Date: 19971229
Docket: T-2674-96
OTTAWA, ONTARIO, THE 29th DAY OF DECEMBER 1997
Present: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE LUTFY
IN THE MATTER OF the Citizenship Act,
R.S.C., 1985, c. C-29
AND IN THE MATTER OF an appeal from the decision
of a Citizenship Judge
AND IN THE MATTER OF
KADRA HUSSEIN WAISS,
Appellant.
JUDGMENT
The appeal is dismissed.
| Allan Lutfy |
| Judge |
Certified true translation
Stephen Balogh
Date: 19971229
Docket: T-2674-96
IN THE MATTER OF the Citizenship Act,
R.S.C., 1985, c. C-29
AND IN THE MATTER OF an appeal from the decision
of a Citizenship Judge
AND IN THE MATTER OF
KADRA HUSSEIN WAISS,
Appellant.
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
LUTFY J.
[1] On June 21, 1994, the appellant was convicted of fraud within the meaning of paragraph 380(1)(a) of the Criminal Code.
[2] On December 8, 1994, a judge of the Court of Quebec suspended the passing of sentence and directed that the appellant be released subject to a probation order for a period of one year.
[3] On January 24, 1995, the appellant applied for citizenship.
[4] Section 22 of the Citizenship Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. C-29, provides that a person shall not be granted citizenship while under a probation order or if he or she has been convicted of an indictable offence during the three year period immediately preceding the date of his or her application. Subparagraph 22(1)(a)(i) and paragraph 22(2)(a) read as follows:
22. (1) Notwithstanding anything in this Act, a person shall not be granted citizenship under section 5 or subsection 11(1) or take the oath of citizenship
(a) while the person is, pursuant to any enactment in force in Canada,
(i) under a probation order. . . .
. . .
(2) Notwithstanding anything in this Act, but subject to the Criminal Records Act, a person shall not be granted citizenship under section 5 or subsection 11(1) or take the oath of citizenship if,
(a) during the three year period immediately preceding the date of the person's application, or. . .
. . .
the person has been convicted of an offence under subsection 29(2) or (3) or of an indictable offence under any Act of Parliament, other than an offence that is designated as a contravention under the Contraventions Act.
22. (1) Malgré les autres dispositions de la présente loi, nul ne peut recevoir la citoyenneté au titre de l'article 5 ou du paragraphe 11(1) ni prêter le serment de citoyenneté_:
a) pendant la période où, en application d'une disposition législative en vigueur au Canada_:
(i) il est sous le coup d'une ordonnance de probation. . . .
. . .
(2) Malgré les autres dispositions de la présente loi, mais sous réserve de la Loi sur le casier judiciaire, nul ne peut recevoir la citoyenneté au titre de l'article 5 ou du paragraphe 11(1) ni prêter le serment de citoyenneté s'il a été déclaré coupable d'une infraction prévue aux paragraphes 29(2) ou (3) ou d'un acte criminel prévu par une loi fédérale, autre qu'une infraction qualifiée de contravention en vertu de la Loi sur les contraventions_:
a) au cours des trois ans précédant la date de sa demande. . . .
[5] On October 6, 1996, the Citizenship Judge dismissed the appellant"s application. His reasons read in part as follow:
| [TRANSLATION] Section 22 of the Act provides that a person shall not be granted Canadian citizenship while he or she is under a probation order, is a paroled inmate, or is confined in or is an inmate of any penitentiary, jail, reformatory or prison. Furthermore, a person shall not be granted Canadian citizenship if he or she has been convicted of an indictable offence or an offence under the Citizenship Act during the three-year period immediately preceding the date of his or her application. |
[6] At the time of the Citizenship Judge"s decision, more than one year had elapsed since the commencement of the appellant"s probation period, and she was in my view no longer under a probation order within the meaning of section 22 of the Act.
[7] Furthermore, counsel for the appellant submits that his client must be deemed not to have been convicted of an indictable offence within the meaning of subsection 22(2) because the court directed by order that she be discharged absolutely or on the conditions prescribed in a probation order. He referred to subsections 736(1) and (3) of the Criminal Code:
736. (1) Where an accused, other than a corporation, pleads guilty to or is found guilty of an offence, other than an offence for which a minimum punishment is prescribed by law or an offence punishable, in the proceedings commenced against him, by imprisonment for fourteen years or for life, the court before which he appears may, if it considers it to be in the best interests of the accused and not contrary to the public interest, instead of convicting the accused, by order direct that the accused be discharged absolutely or on the conditions prescribed in a probation order.
. . .
(3) Where a court directs under subsection (1) that an offender be discharged of an offence, the offender shall be deemed not to have been convicted of the offence. . . .
736. (1) Le tribunal devant lequel comparaît un accusé, autre qu'une personne morale, qui plaide coupable ou est reconnu coupable d'une infraction pour laquelle la loi ne prescrit pas une peine minimale ou qui n'est pas punissable, à la suite des procédures engagées contre lui, d'un emprisonnement de quatorze ans ou à perpétuité peut, s'il considère qu'y y va de l'intérêt véritable de l'accusé sans nuire à l'intérêt public, au lieu de le condamner, prescrire par ordonnance qu'il soit absous inconditionnellement ou aux conditions prescrites dans une ordonnance de probation.
. . .
(3) Le contrevenant qui est absous en conformité avec le paragraphe (1) est réputé ne pas avoir été condamné à l'égard de l'infraction. . . .
[8] There is no evidence that the appellant was discharged within the meaning of section 736 of the Criminal Code. Rather, the passing of her sentence was suspended and she was released subject to a probation order for a period of one year. Subsection 736(3) does not apply in these circumstances. For the purposes of this appeal, the appellant is a person who has been convicted of an indictable offence.
[9] The appellant applied for citizenship less than three years after being convicted of an indictable offence. Her appeal is accordingly dismissed. The third anniversary of her conviction date has now passed and a new application for citizenship could be made.
| Allan Lutfy |
| Judge |
Ottawa, Ontario
December 29, 1997
Certified true translation
Stephen Balogh
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
COURT NO.: T-2674-96
STYLE OF CAUSE: THE CITIZENSHIP ACT v.
KADRA HUSSEIN WAISS
PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec
DATE OF HEARING: December 16, 1997
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT BY LUTFY J.
DATED: December 29, 1997
APPEARANCES:
Jean-Philippe Brunet FOR THE APPELLANT
Jean Caumartin THE AMICUS CURIAE
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
BRUNET ARSENAULT FOR THE APPELLANT
MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC
JEAN CAUMARTIN THE AMICUS CURIAE
MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC