The Supreme Court this week heard argument on five cases that could change how Canada defines both human smuggling and refugee claims. Given its potential impact, the case attracted interventions from law groups across the country.
Eight of the nine appellants in the cases are Sri Lankan refugee claimants who arrived in Canada aboard either the MV Ocean Lady or the MV Sun Sea in 2009 and 2010 respectively.
The cases centre on the constitutionality of section 117 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which defines criminality for human smuggling.
The law currently criminalizes anyone assisting someone entering Canada without valid documentation as a human smuggler, including humanitarian workers assisting refugees fleeing persecution.
The Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers (CARL), an intervener in the case, argued that the law is unconstitutional and means that those who are refugees might never be able to make their refugee claim, and might be deported or left in legal limbo.
