加拿大難民程式/165 - 成員的權力
立法條款規定
Powers of a commissioner 165 The Refugee Protection Division, the Refugee Appeal Division and the Immigration Division and each member of those Divisions have the powers and authority of a commissioner appointed under Part I of the Inquiries Act and may do any other thing they consider necessary to provide a full and proper hearing.
根據之前的《移民法》，等效條款的表述如下
67. (1) The Refugee Division has, in respect of proceedings under sections 69.1 and 69.2, sole and exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine all questions of law and fact, including questions of jurisdiction. (2) The Refugee Division, and each member thereof, has all the powers and authority of a commissioner appointed under Part I of the Inquiries Act and, without restricting the generality of the foregoing, may, for the purposes of a hearing, (a) issue a summons to any person requiring that person to appear at the time and place mentioned therein to testify with respect to all matters within that person's knowledge relative to the subject-matter of the hearing and to bring and produce any document, book or paper that the person has or controls relative to that subject-matter; (b) administer oaths and examine any person on oath; (c) issue commissions or requests to take evidence in Canada; and (d) do any other thing necessary to provide a full and proper hearing.
隨著《移民和難民保護法》的出現，上述條款被修正為以下內容：[1]
165. The Refugee Protection Division and the Immigration Division and each member of those Divisions have the powers and authority of a commissioner appointed under Part I of the Inquiries Act and may do any other thing they consider necessary to provide a full and proper hearing.
《釋義法》第 31(2) 條規定：“凡授予任何個人、官員或職員以執行任何行動或事項的權力，則所有必要的權力，以使該個人、官員或職員能夠執行或強制執行該行動或事項，均視為也已授予。”[2]
除了傳喚證人的權力外，成員還擁有“為提供充分而適當的聽證會而採取的任何其他措施”的權力。委員會指出，這項權力可能包括，除其他事項外，允許書記員、口譯員和保安人員在聽證會中提供協助。它還將包括在必要時休庭和變更訴訟地點的權力。[3]
關於 RAD 提出問題和引入新證據的權力，請參見：加拿大難民程式/110-111 - 上訴至難民上訴分庭#RAD 必須根據 RPD 程式記錄進行處理，無需舉行聽證會，但須遵守列出的例外情況，但本條款不限制 RAD 提出問題或引入新證據.
依賴此條款的一個例子是，在 COVID-19 疫情期間，委員會延長了申請人必須在入境口岸提出申請後提供申訴理由表格的時間期限。關於此的實踐通知引用了該法的此項條款（“[...]（分庭）...可以採取任何其他措施，以提供充分而適當的聽證會”）作為該決定的依據，正如本對 RPD 規則 8 的評論中所述：加拿大難民程式/RPD 規則 3-13 - 應提供的資訊和檔案#本規則適用於延期申請，但不限制委員會自行延長期限的能力.
法院在《加拿大訴卡隆案》中得出結論，RPD 無權在正式聽證會之前或之外強迫提供證據。[4] 也就是說，委員會可能需要協助申請人獲取資訊，例如要求部長向相關加拿大執法機構進行詢問。有關詳細資訊，請參見：加拿大難民程式/委員會的調查性任務#如果申請人沒有獲得與其主張相關的檔案的可能性.
此外，這些權力不能在正式聽證會之外使用的觀點很難與委員會關於其實踐及其如何解釋此權力的長期宣告相協調
在法庭上，法官參與任何形式的調查都是不恰當的，無論證據對法官來說多麼不令人滿意。然而，由於難民分庭的非對抗性性質，以及其成員擁有根據《調查法》第一部分任命的專員的權力和權威，因此在某些情況下，難民分庭成員可以自行調查案件的事實。[5]
此外，Kahlon似乎沒有考慮該條款的立法史，該條款明確刪除了對該權力施加的限制，規定該權力僅用於聽證會。隨著《難民保護法》的頒佈，該法案發生了變化，使得RPD成員被授予權力，可以進一步調查他們認為對驗證索賠的可信度至關重要的任何問題。Sanders Carcamo v. Canada似乎證實了該法案第 165 條適用，即使在沒有舉行聽證會的情況下也是如此。[6]
另見：《難民保護法》第 170 條規定，難民保護司在其面前的任何訴訟中，可以調查其認為與確定索賠是否成立有關的任何事項，該條款是與《難民保護法》一同引入的。另見：加拿大難民程式/170 - 訴訟#《難民保護法》第 170(a) 條 - 可以調查其認為與確定索賠是否成立有關的任何事項。
成員的管轄範圍不受加拿大領土的限制。
[edit | edit source]委員會已宣告
難民司成員的管轄範圍不受領土限制。例如，通常在蒙特利爾審理案件的難民司成員也可以在溫哥華審理案件，反之亦然。[7]
該條款可以用來支援以下論點：委員會可以命令部長協助將加拿大境外的申訴人遣返加拿大。
[edit | edit source]《難民保護法》第 165 條賦予司成員根據《調查法》第 1 部分擔任專員的權力，以及“為提供充分、適當的聽證會而採取他們認為必要的任何其他行動”的權力。如果某事提交給該司，而申訴人身處加拿大境外，且無法透過電信進行裁決，則該條款可以說可以作為該司可以命令部長協助將相關人員遣返加拿大（例如，透過向該個人頒發旅行證件）的依據。
但請參閱《難民保護法》第 175(2) 條，該條規定 IAD 可以要求官員向個人頒發旅行證件，該條款沒有適用於 RPD 和 RAD 的等效條款，這可能意味著這些司缺乏此類權力。此外，在之前的《移民法》下，委員會指出其難民司沒有管轄權命令部長或加拿大公民及移民部 (CIC) 將某人從加拿大驅逐或不驅逐出加拿大，或允許某人來加拿大參加聽證會。[7]
另見：聯邦法院已經下令政府盡最大努力將個人遣返加拿大，如果這是難民申訴的必要條件，或者如果該個人被發現是身處國外的公約難民。[8]
另見：加拿大難民程式/RPD 規則 53 - 更改訴訟地點#即使申訴人離開加拿大，該司也有管轄權進行聽證會。
《調查法》第 I 部分
[edit | edit source]《調查法》第 I 部分的完整文字如下：
PART I Public Inquiries Inquiry 2 The Governor in Council may, whenever the Governor in Council deems it expedient, cause inquiry to be made into and concerning any matter connected with the good government of Canada or the conduct of any part of the public business thereof. Appointment of commissioners 3 Where an inquiry as described in section 2 is not regulated by any special law, the Governor in Council may, by a commission, appoint persons as commissioners by whom the inquiry shall be conducted. Powers of commissioners concerning evidence 4 The commissioners have the power of summoning before them any witnesses, and of requiring them to (a) give evidence, orally or in writing, and on oath or, if they are persons entitled to affirm in civil matters on solemn affirmation; and (b) produce such documents and things as the commissioners deem requisite to the full investigation of the matters into which they are appointed to examine. Idem, enforcement 5 The commissioners have the same power to enforce the attendance of witnesses and to compel them to give evidence as is vested in any court of record in civil cases.
這些條款允許小組強制傳喚證人並提供證據。
[edit | edit source]正如《公共調查程式》中所述，《調查法》的核心程式特徵是“授權專員強制傳喚證人並提供證據”。[9] RPD 將透過 RPD 規則 44-48 的框架行使其傳喚個人的權力：加拿大難民程式/RPD 規則 44-48 - 證人。
有關委員會傳喚檔案的權力的討論，請參閱Canada v. Kahlon。[10] 訪問記錄的請求應由持有記錄的政府機構而不是主管部長處理。[11]
這些權力必須以公平的方式行使，這通常需要向部長髮出通知。
[edit | edit source]司成員擁有根據《調查法》任命的專員的權力。這賦予他們傳喚證人並要求其提供上述《法案》第 4 條規定的證據的權力。當小組行使這些權力時，必須以對部長公平的方式行使，無論其是否如相關司的規則所定義的那樣是訴訟的當事方。例如，在Canada v. Miller中，部長沒有介入訴訟，當 RAD 要求上訴人進一步提交材料時，部長沒有收到此通知。聯邦法院裁定，這在程式上不公平，並以此為由撤銷了該決定。[12] 另見：加拿大難民程式/RPD 規則 1 - 定義#儘管部長不是訴訟的當事方，但他們可能需要程式公正。
《調查法》第 III 部分
[edit | edit source]《調查法》第 III 部分是一項通用條款，適用於根據第 I 部分擁有權力的專員，以及根據該法案第 II 部分任命的專員（與 IRB 委員會成員無關）。
PART III General Employment of counsel, experts and assistants 11 (1) The commissioners, whether appointed under Part I or under Part II, may, if authorized by the commission issued in the case, engage the services of (a) such accountants, engineers, technical advisers or other experts, clerks, reporters and assistants as they deem necessary or advisable; and (b) counsel to aid and assist the commissioners in an inquiry. Experts may take evidence and report (2) The commissioners may authorize and depute any accountants, engineers, technical advisers or other experts, the services of whom are engaged under subsection (1), or any other qualified persons, to inquire into any matter within the scope of the commission as may be directed by the commissioners. Powers (3) The persons deputed under subsection (2), when authorized by order in council, have the same powers as the commissioners have to take evidence, issue subpoenas, enforce the attendance of witnesses, compel them to give evidence, and otherwise conduct the inquiry. Report (4) The persons deputed under subsection (2) shall report the evidence and their findings, if any, thereon to the commissioners. Parties may employ counsel 12 The commissioners may allow any person whose conduct is being investigated under this Act, and shall allow any person against whom any charge is made in the course of an investigation, to be represented by counsel. Notice to persons charged 13 No report shall be made against any person until reasonable notice has been given to the person of the charge of misconduct alleged against him and the person has been allowed full opportunity to be heard in person or by counsel.
參考文獻
[edit | edit source]- ↑ Canada (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) v. Kahlon, 2005 FC 1000 (CanLII), [2006] 3 FCR 493, 第 21 段，<https://canlii.ca/t/1ldlc#par21>，於 2022-08-04 檢索。
- ↑ 解釋法，RSC 1985，c I-21，第 31 條，<https://canlii.ca/t/7vhg#sec31>，於 2022-08-23 檢索。
- ↑ 加拿大移民與難民委員會。難民司的權力，最後更新：2006 年 9 月 6 日，線上 <https://web.archive.org/web/20071115153348/http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/en/references/legal/rpd/handbook/hb02_e.htm> (於 2023 年 11 月 9 日訪問)。
- ↑ Canada (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) v. Kahlon, 2005 FC 1000 (CanLII), [2006] 3 FCR 493, 第 42 段，<https://canlii.ca/t/1ldlc#par42>，於 2022-08-04 檢索。
- ↑ 加拿大移民與難民委員會。CRDD 手冊，日期：1999 年 3 月 31 日，線上 <https://web.archive.org/web/20080331073416/https://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/en/references/legal/rpd/handbook/hb01_e.htm> (於 2023 年 11 月 9 日訪問)。
- ↑ Sanders Carcamo c. Canada (Citoyenneté et Immigration), 2024 CF 1181 (CanLII), 第 7 段，<https://canlii.ca/t/k61wd#par7>，於 2024-08-12 訪問。
- ↑ a b 加拿大移民與難民委員會。CRDD 手冊：管轄權，日期：1999 年 3 月 31 日，線上：<https://web.archive.org/web/20071115152433/http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/en/references/legal/rpd/handbook/hb03_e.htm> (於 2023 年 11 月 13 日訪問)。
- ↑ Rocha Badillo v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2024 FC 1092 (CanLII), 第 37 段，<https://canlii.ca/t/k5rd8#par37>，於 2024-09-13 檢索。
- ↑ Ratushny, Ed, 《公共調查程式：法律、政策和實踐》，於 2009 年 9 月 28 日釋出，Irwin Law：多倫多，線上電子書：https://www.deslibris.ca/ID/432671，第 301 頁。
- ↑ Canada (Minister of Public Safety & Emergency Preparedness) v. Kahlon, [2005] F.C.J. No. 1335, [2006] 3 F.C.R. 493 (F.C.)。
- ↑ Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) v. Dos Santos Freitas, 2024 FC 608 (CanLII), 第 18 段，<https://canlii.ca/t/k45zc#par18>，於 2024-05-16 檢索。
- ↑ 加拿大（公民與移民）訴米勒案，2022 FC 1131 (CanLII)，第 60 段，<https://canlii.ca/t/jr5nh#par60>，於 2022 年 8 月 3 日檢索。