Why Bill C-24 is alien to our cherished values
It seems to imply dual citizens are second-class Canadians, writes Pallavi Valabhji.
When Bill C-24 passed in June 2014, my heart grew heavy. And it remains heavy every time I think about it, which is a fair amount these days given it’s become something of a hot-button issue in the upcoming elections.
Among other provisions, Bill C-24, the Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act, grants the government the power to revoke a dual national’s Canadian citizenship and deport them to their other country of citizenship if the said national is convicted of crimes such as treason, terrorism, or spying. The decision to revoke citizenship would lie in the hands of the citizenship and immigration minister or other officials, thus bypassing the Federal Court.
Bill C-24 offends me because it makes me feel as if I’m a second-class Canadian by dint of being a dual national. I was born and spent my childhood in one country, lived in another one during my high school years, went on to attend college and graduate school and subsequently work in yet another before eventually landing in Canada, the fourth country that I have lived in. Toronto has been my home base for more than 14 years now.
Maintaining emotional ties to latitudes and longitudes extending beyond the borders of Canada and holding dual citizenship feel as normal and as natural as breathing. Never mind that in our interdependent, global economy, dual (or even multiple) citizenship may actually work out to be an asset that helps expand the scope of individual opportunity in the international marketplace, which in turn translates into some of those wealth gains making their way back to Canada.
Bill C-24 makes me feel bad for keeping the citizenship of my birthplace, when that is as much my right as it is to be a Canadian national. It’s as if, all of a sudden, I’ve been callously tossed into a category that forces a prejudicial
I fail to grasp how this brainchild is going to help protect us from the bad guys.
distinction to be made between Canadians who are holders of Canadian citizenship only, and those who are dual nationals. Somehow, against all logic, it seems to imply — thoughtlessly, but perhaps unintentionally — that dual citizens would conceivably be more likely to commit heinous acts of treason, a notion that I find deeply offensive and entirely alien to the spirit and letter of cherished Canadian values of freedom, peace, tolerance, justice and prosperity.
On the flip side, you could say that Bill C-24 applies to a bunch of criminals, so why should we care whether or not they get to remain Canadians? We should care because the sacred principle at stake here is that once citizenship is granted, it cannot be taken away from you, and it certainly not because there happens to be a second nationality in place. Because if we pay this kind of lip service to the idea of citizenship, then we’re setting ourselves up for failure to uphold the very values that mean something in the real world, and that have a real impact on our lives.
Call me slow on the uptake, but Bill C-24 makes no sense whatsoever. I fail to grasp how this brainchild is going to help protect us from the bad guys. Surely, there’s a more constructive use for the government funds and human resources that would be allocated towards seeing the process of stripping someone of citizenship through.
Our strength as a people lies in championing our diversity. It is the only real weapon against the hate that fuels heinous deeds, and that’s the canoe we’ve all got to keep paddling: in embracing pluralism in our society, in ensuring inclusiveness and equality for all, and in upholding the rule of law, we can take pride in saying “once a Canadian, always a Canadian.”