|
|
 |
Home - My Yahoo! - Help |
 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |||
Friday July 21 5:55 PM ET
Judge mulls over who should hear plea for imprisoned
migrants
TORONTO (CP) - Lawyers pleading for the freedom of 13 imprisoned migrant teenagers will first have to wait for an Ontario Superior Court justice to decide who should hear their argument. The teens, who are awaiting their claims for refugee status, were arrested during a series of attempts in January and February to smuggle Chinese migrants from Ontario into the United States.
Most have been in custody for nearly six months, which their lawyers say is a violation of their constitutional rights.
Lawyers for the migrants were to square off Friday against the Ministry of Citizenship and Immigration, but got bogged down in procedural wrangling about where the case should be heard.
Ministry lawyer Donald MacIntosh told Justice Sandra Chapnik that the argument belongs in Federal Court, which typically handles immigration and deportation cases.
Every 30 days, the teens - aged 15 to 18 - have their cases reviewed by a federal adjudicator who determines whether they should remain in custody, MacIntosh said.
The most recent hearing took place July 7 and has yet to yield a ruling, he added, meaning the Ontario court system can take no action until a decision is made.
"You're being asked to interfere in an ongoing judicial board, commission or tribunal," MacIntosh said.
"There is nothing unique about this particular case . . .all of these matters are reviewable in Federal Court."
But Maureen Silcoff, one of several lawyers representing the migrants, insists the matter is one of constitutional rights, which gives the province the authority to decide the fate of the prisoners.
The case is indeed unique, she added, because it involves a group of unaccompanied children, rather than children and their parents.
"They're at risk physically, they're being bullied by the other inmates, they're having problems with the guards . . .and they're not going to school," Silcoff said.
"Adults and (unaccompanied) children should not be detained together."
Chapnik reserved her judgment on where the case should be heard, and the two sides won't argue the application itself until that ruling is made. © The Canadian Press, 2000
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |