Respect for the practice of sanctuary offered by churches to individuals denied refugee status appears to be on shaky ground. Thanks to a policy added to the enforcement manual of the Canada Border Services Agency, the tradition of sanctuary may be violated in certain situations.
After two years of discussion, the formal policy was added in March, and, according to a story in the National Post, “the agency believes church sanctuary cases can ‘pose a threat to the integrity of the immigration system.'”
The article notes that CBSA officials have so far opted not to enter places of worship, but that the new policy “outlines in broad terms some of the ‘exceptional circumstances’ when entering a church might be necessary, including ‘cases where there are strong public calls for enforcement action’ or where there’s a risk to public safety or national security, such as cases involving terrorists or murderers.”
But officials may still decide to enter a church even in cases that are not thought to be security threats: “the policy states that sanctuary cases will be closely monitored and if there is evidence of widespread abuse, forced entry may be required in less-urgent cases ‘to maintain the integrity of the system.'”
The Post‘s story states that agency staff are growing more wary of letting churches decide which cases are security threats, and which ones are not, noting that public opinion on the issue of sanctuary is divided.
Stephen Allen, associate secretary of the Presbyterian Church’s Justice Ministries, puts things into perspective, noting that, “Nothing has ever stopped federal officials in Canada from entering a church to apprehend a failed claimant who sought and was given sanctuary. There is nothing in Canadian law that legitimizes sanctuary. It is a historical practice that continues to carry some moral legitimacy.”
Allen notes the recognition that Canadians are divided on the practice of offering sanctuary, and whether or not government officials should be allowed to violate the practice. “This suggests some understanding of the issue and some affirmation for sanctuary as a moral principle by a segment of the Canadian public.”
Since 2000, there have been 30 cases of churches offering sanctuary. There are currently three active sanctuary cases in Canada, two in British Columbia and one in Ontario.
While Presbyterian congregations often sponsor refugees coming to Canada, the Presbyterian Church hasn’t had any cases of sanctuary, but the General Assembly did pass a statement on the issue back in 2006. It notes that, “Sanctuary is an act of civil disobedience and carries penalties.”
However, after considering Living Faith, the Book of Forms, and the Declaration of Faith Concerning Church and Nation, General Assembly agreed that, “As a public act of faith, sanctuary must be the last resort when all other options have been exhausted and there is probable evidence that an individual will face persecution if deported to his/her country. The decision to offer sanctuary will be a difficult decision. The duty to protect may take precedence over the law if the individual is at risk of persecution.”
It also notes that while responsibility falls to a congregation’s session for deciding on how a building is used (including for sanctuary), the decision must be voted on by the congregation, and presbytery can then veto that decision.
“Most cases get resolved through humanitarian and compassionate applications and are not dangers to the public,” said Glynis Williams, director of Action Réfugiés Montréal, a Presbyterian Church-supported agency. “What is of concern is that the new proposed legislation will close off this form of resolution to the issue of churches offering sanctuary.
“On the issue of doubting churches doing appropriate assessments, this seems somewhat unfair. Both the United Church of Canada and the Anglican Church of Canada [who have offered sanctuary in the past] have excellent guidebooks, with extensive procedures and oversight.”
“I can’t imagine a faith community offering sanctuary to a hardened criminal,” said Allen. “Offering sanctuary is not intended to put into question the integrity of the immigration system, but to protect human beings who the faith community believes would be at risk if deported.” — AM with files from the National Post
