It has been a fact of deportation for sometime that many people who are deported stay around. The Globe on February 13, 2024 reported that only a quarter of people given notice of deportation since 2016 have actually been removed. This is particularly concerning when the basis of the deportation is the commission of a serious criminal offence. No matter how small the share of immigrants who commit crimes, it is a legitimate concern when delays in the justice system contribute to delaying a well-deserved departure from Canada.

Kevin Martin for the Calgary Herald has reported on the delay in just such a case concerning Armin Babic.  The accused is a permanent resident likely facing deportation if convicted. The alleged offence is a home invasion robbery near Okotoks Alberta while impersonating a police officer. Those particulars suggest a degree of planning and strategy that if proven would justify the defendant’s removal.

Perhaps recognising this, Mr. Babic has shown up in court multiple times without a lawyer, claiming that he’s been trying to retain one without success. Recently, on March 4, 2024, Justice Chris Rickards rejected Babic’s application to give him another two months to find counsel, giving him two days instead.

Gaming the system may be particularly easy to achieve when you have the complicating factor that the Federal government pays the costs of our immigration system but the Provincial governments pay the costs of administration of the criminal justice system. The senior level of government has strong incentives not to incur substantial costs pending the outcome of provincially funded proceedings. Apart from costs is simply the common challenge of coordinating priorities between two levels of government.

The fair treatment of permanent residents accused of serious crimes must be taken seriously given the tendency to treat newcomers poorly, but this type of dysfunction simply fuels the perception that both the immigration and criminal justice system are failing the public interest in safety.

When there are additional stakes in timeliness in the delivery of justice we need to find ways to give those cases priority rather than see them represent another category of cases drifting into  delay.