A report by the Toronto-based CD Howe Institute has raised concerns about Canada’s asylum system, claiming that nearly 25,000 asylum applications were approved between 2019 and 2023 without in-person interviews or comprehensive security checks. The report, authored by former senior Canadian immigration official James Yousif, argues that procedural changes introduced to address a growing backlog of refugee claims may have exposed the system to potential security risks and fraud.
According to the study, the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB) approved at least 24,599 asylum claims through a streamlined process that relied on document-based assessments rather than oral hearings. The report states that certain verification procedures traditionally used to identify fraud, criminal activity, or security concerns were reduced or bypassed as authorities attempted to accelerate case processing amid rising asylum applications and increased irregular border crossings.
The report attributes the shift to a policy known as “File Review,” introduced after a sharp rise in asylum claims beginning in 2017. Under this system, applicants from a confidential “Country List” could have their cases assessed solely on written submissions rather than appearing before adjudicators in person. According to the report, this meant some applicants could receive asylum approval by mail without being questioned directly by immigration officials.
A 2024 version of the Country List, obtained through an access-to-information request and cited in the report, reportedly includes nationals from 24 countries described as higher-risk due to instability, organised crime concerns, or geopolitical tensions. Countries named include Pakistan, Russia, Afghanistan, Yemen, Venezuela, Eritrea, Iran, and North Korea. The report argues that while the policy was intended to prioritise applicants from conflict-affected or fragile states—where claims were considered more likely to be genuine—it may also have reduced scrutiny in cases where stronger security vetting was necessary.
The Canadian asylum system is designed to provide protection to individuals who can demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution, including risks of torture, death, or cruel treatment in their home countries. Normally, claims undergo multiple stages of review involving Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) or the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), followed by a determination by the IRB’s Refugee Protection Division.
However, Yousif’s report contends that replacing oral hearings with paper-based assessments weakened safeguards that help officials evaluate credibility and detect inconsistencies. It cites a 2024 case in which a Pakistani national was arrested in Quebec while his asylum claim was still pending, allegedly linked to a terrorism plot targeting sites in New York, as an example of potential risks associated with reduced scrutiny.
The report also notes a significant rise in asylum acceptance rates, stating that Canada’s approval rate has increased from about 64.6 percent in 2019 to roughly 80 percent in recent years, higher than rates reported in several European countries. At the same time, asylum claims have surged sharply, with annual processing numbers growing from around 6,000 cases per year in the 2010s to more than 173,000 claims in 2024. Government data cited in the report indicates that authorities investigated an average of over 9,000 suspected immigration fraud cases per month in 2024.
Some immigration commentators have reacted strongly to the findings, arguing that the system may be vulnerable to misuse. Canadian immigration consultant Kanwar Singh Sierah said on social media that the report highlights broader structural weaknesses, though such opinions reflect individual interpretations rather than official conclusions.
Canadian government officials have previously acknowledged pressures on the asylum system. Past immigration ministers have warned that some individuals attempt to use asylum claims as alternative pathways to remain in Canada, including cases involving visa overstays or irregular crossings. At the same time, authorities maintain that Canada’s asylum framework is grounded in humanitarian obligations to protect people fleeing persecution.
The Yousif report concludes that while the File Review system helped reduce backlogs, eliminating in-person interviews removed one of the most important safeguards for assessing credibility and national security risks. It calls for restoring stronger screening procedures to balance humanitarian commitments with security and system integrity.
