eb_babak said:
As many of you might have heard today from Tim he has sent us an email which starts by stating:
"Rocco has given up. He will not pursue the appeal because, whatever the outcome at the Federal Court of Appeal, the matter would have to move to the Supreme Court of Canada for a final decision. He’s not willing to invest his time and knows that, going to the Supreme Court would be very, very expensive. So, we are on our own now...."
Mr. Leahy has continued with:
"This reality gives us two options: (a) we can raise the matter directly with the Minister and/or (b) file a new court case, asking the Court to order DoJ counsel to forward the request to the Minister himself. Before doing either, I would like to have each of you explain why the Minister should grant the request."
Please refer to his latest email you should have been received if you have been part of mandamus litigation.
Basically we are at the end of line considering the fact that we are now using the last option of appealing to Minister of immigration personally. While I believe that Liberal government has more reasonable approach toward immigration but the fact is that the Minister is not aware of our issue or he may not consider it as a priority or as an option at all. Minister of immigration has been very active and busy to reverse the damages which have been caused by Conservatives and Jason Kenny in particular to immigration, citizenship and refugee laws and has done a good job on that front, considering the pressure and opposition from anti-immigrant Canadian front who basically consider first and second generation immigrants and even Canadian aboriginals as non-Canadian.
For our case while I still will follow what Tim has suggested by sending my reasons to him, but this is merely to make the minister of immigration, which I believe is a reasonable man, aware of the extent of the damages and injustice we have suffered. We can hope for the best but we need to prepare ourselves to accept the reality that Jason Kenny has done an excellent job in defrauding all of us. Current minister of immigration has no obligation to grant us permanent residency or re-open our files.
I asked Tim about what I said I would. Here was my question:
"I am wondering , when the application for permanent residency have been filed and processing fee was paid, did CIC had the obligation to process the application (i.e. look into it). If not, then how accepting processing fee in advance of processing application is justified. Better speaking, even if there were not such a direct obligation, wouldn't accepting and holding processing fee for years with no intention of processing the application constitute a reason for bringing application for 'fraud', 'misleading', 'abuse of power', 'distortion' and 'false advertising'?
Did we have anywhere in the application which has mentioned or implied that CIC had no responsibility to process the application and reserve the right to terminate it?"
Tim's answer:
"In the lead case, Liang, the Court noted that CIC had conceded that it had a duty to process the applications. What happened was that Kenney had Parliament terminate the files, thereby vitiating the obligation to process, which action the Court has upheld."
And this is my personal conclusion (NOT from Mr. Leahy):
While I trust that Tim knows every aspect of immigration law, I believe that court itself is in contempt of its procedure to deal with the matters justly and objectively because it would be chaotic if everybody would give himself/herself the right to undo the commitment unilaterally if we take the justification of court for the termination of an obligation with no consequences. Any country has the liberty to do whatever it desires with anyone, say Canadian government can confiscate any foreign investment if parliament votes for it, because Canada need that money... What Canadian court is telling me is that I can switch my mortgage regardless of my agreement with the lender and go to a better rate because I have found a cheaper rate with another bank and because my household voted in majority for it. I can say and sign something today and do opposite tomorrow because I found it better suited me...
Well, my friends, we are facing an organized fraud which has been endorsed by Canadian courts. When a court, which is supposed to be the reflective of a country's morals and conscience turns a blind eye and further, endorses an obvious fraud, distortion, false advertising, committing with the intention of violation of the commitment, then the court has disqualified itself as being a valid reference for justice.
