The principles of the best interest of the child in Canadian immigration proceedings are reinforced in the case of Baker v. Canada. When Mavis Baker’s application for permanent residence was refused, and she received a deportation order, she proceeded with a judicial review of her application (Baker v. Canada, 1999). The findings at the conclusion of this case have direct implications for the assessment of permanent residence applications under the humanitarian and compassionate category, and the considerations of the best interests of the child.
As stated in s. 25(1) of Canada’s Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, a child whose interests will be directly affected must be taken in to account during the assessment of a humanitarian and compassionate application (Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, 2016). Baker v. Canada further reinforces these principles as the Federal Court of Appeal determined that the best interests of Mavis Baker’s children needed to be considered in order for the ruling to be fair, and that “the decision maker should consider children’s best interests as an important factor, give them substantial weight, and be alert, alive and sensitive to them” (Baker v. Canada, 1999, para. 75). Furthermore, the
…show more content…
Canada upholds that the best interests of the child are central to the decision making process on humanitarian and compassionate applications. “[T]he rights, interests, and needs of children and special attention to childhood are important clauses that should be considered in reasonably interpreting the “humanitarian” and “compassionate” considerations that guide the exercise of discretion” (Baker v. Canada, 1999, para. 73). The Court upholds that for a decision on an H&C application to be reasonable it “requires close attention to the interests and needs of the children. Children’s rights and attention to their interests, are central humanitarian and compassionate values in Canadian society.” (Baker v. Canada, 1999, para.