Ending the Roxham Road Theater

Why make people come in through the window when there is a door right next to it?

This is the question we must ask ourselves when looking at what is happening at Roxham Road, this entry route for asylum seekers to Canada.

A question that is based on foundations that the Supreme Court agreed to study Thursday, which allows us to hope for a release.

Let’s sum up. In theory, Roxham Road is an irregular entry route for migrants who want to reach Canada. In practice, it is less and less.

It became very clear a few weeks ago, when the path was “reopened” after being closed during the pandemic. Ottawa has in fact lifted the ban on borrowing it. It is still strange that our authorities are opening and closing an irregular route as if it were official.

Our colleague Vincent Larouche also told us this week that private contracts have been awarded in this corner of the Montérégie to a generous donor from the Liberal Party of Canada, who rents his land to the government so that it can welcome migrants and the officials who receive them.

There is no shortage of troubling elements in this story, but we retain one: Ottawa has just signed a new five-year lease with this man. This suggests that the government expects the Roxham Road situation to continue for several more years.

This raises questions.

Yes, Roxham Road is a humane way of welcoming asylum seekers in a complicated context. It is certainly better to receive these people in an organized manner than to erect barbed wire in their path and force them to go through the woods.

The fact remains that this informal border post has become the permanent setting for a vast play. A play in which everyone has learned their role. The migrants introduce themselves. RCMP officers warn them that they will be arrested if they continue on their way. The migrants continue, are arrested and taken to offices of the Canada Border Services Agency.

If asylum seekers come to Roxham rather than the real Saint-Bernard-de-Lacolle border post located nearby, it is because of the Safe Third Country Agreement between Canada and the States. -United. It specifies that an asylum seeker must submit his application in the first country where he sets foot.

Migrants who make an official request at the Canadian border from the United States are thus automatically turned away. Some even end up imprisoned on American soil afterwards, which is absolutely shocking. Surprisingly, when they go through Roxham Road instead, the procedure is completely different. Canadian and international laws then oblige the authorities to study their asylum request.

So there is a clear incentive to go through Roxham. This clearly shows that the agreement has perverse effects and must be reviewed.

The famous deal has been challenged by the Canadian Council for Refugees, Amnesty International and other groups. They won the first round in Federal Court, but were unsuccessful in the Court of Appeal, mainly for technical reasons. The Supreme Court has just announced that it accepts to hear them in turn.

These lawsuits give the impression that Ottawa is defending tooth and nail the safe third country agreement. In fact, the government also wants to review it. But he wants to do it bilaterally with the Americans. And since it is Canada that has a problem with Roxham Road and that is in demand, we must convince Washington to sit down at the table.

The challenge is to find a solution that would not provoke an influx of migrants to Canada from the United States, but which would respect their right to be treated fairly. In any case, it is through official channels that this will be achieved. Not with irregular border posts that take the place of the real ones.

Handing a stool to people who come in through the window is good. Welcoming them at the door would be more dignified and more practical for everyone.