.jpg)
For many, many years, seeking asylum in Canada became the immigration option for people who were unable to obtain permanent residence through economic pathways such as Express Entry or provincial nomination. Some sought asylum because they truly needed that protection, while others used it as a way to enter the country.
Over time, the number of refugees began to rise exponentially. Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) took notice and, recognizing that the situation was unsustainable, implemented changes to the system.
This sparked a wave of discontent among many people who viewed it as a violation of constitutional rights in the country.
But is this a violation of rights or a valid legal measure?
In this blog post, I'll analyze this situation and explain what's changing so you can determine whether you truly qualify for protection or if you need a different immigration plan tailored to your circumstances.
On March 26, 2026, Bill C12 became law, but what is striking about this is that the government made it retroactive, and it even affects people who applied for or sought asylum before that date.
The first significant change is that the law imposes aban that states the following:
For example: A person arrived in Canada on June 25, 2020, and waited a year to apply for asylum; applied a year after arriving; or had not yet applied when this law went into effect. Therefore, since more than a year has passed since they entered the country, unfortunately they cannot apply for asylum.
According to an official source on the IRCC website: Effective June 3, 2025,
These complications result in ineligibility, even for people who had already applied for asylum before this law was enacted.
Scenario 1: A person applied for refugee status in September 2025, but by the exact time of the application, 15 months had already passed since arriving in Canada. Upon calculation, the date exceeds the time limit stipulated by law, so the person is not eligible either.
Scenario 2: A person traveled to Canada 10 years ago. Her stay was brief (one month). She left and returned. The situation in her home country forced her to seek asylum after that first trip.
If this person applied for refugee status, for example, in September 2025, and had just arrived in Canada—meaning it had not been a year since their most recent entry, but they had entered the country 10 years earlier (more than a year ago)—unfortunately, they are not eligible to have their case referred to the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB).
Scenario 3: A child traveled to Canada 15 years ago to participate in a soccer tournament; that child is now 18 years old and is applying for asylum. That person, even if he or she traveled alone and even if the primary refugee applicant is his or her mother or father, will receive a letter of ineligibility preventing his or her case from being referred to the IRB. However, his or her mother’s or father’s case would be accepted, since they have never previously entered Canada.
Scenario 4: Asylum or refugee applications filed more than 14 days after a person entered Canada via the land border with the United States will also be ineligible. Therefore, if a person entered on foot or via the land border and more than 14 days had passed by the time they applied for asylum, their case will also be ineligible.
While it is clear that the influx of refugees and the backlog of applications are so great that it is logical and necessary for the government to set limits, doing so retroactively and without exceptions is a complete aberration of the law.
Personally, I believe there should be exceptions.
A minor cannot be excluded simply because they traveled so many years ago, nor can an adult who traveled at a time when the current refugee crisis did not even exist.
It is important to determine which scenario applies to your case.
However, they will allow you to respond in accordance with the right to be heard through a process known as a Procedural Fairness Letter (PFL).
In these cases, it’s a good idea to think about how and when you arrived; check the date you entered the country and ask yourself: Have I been in Canada for more than 12 months?
If the answer is yes, unfortunately, your asylum case will not be referred to a judge for a hearing.
If you are under 12 months old and apply for asylum before turning one year old, your case will be referred to the IRB for a hearing.
It is important to keep in mind that there are some very sensitive issues involved; therefore, if it is determined that the person is not eligible, they will receive a letter of Procedural Fairness Letter; in it, they will need to explain why they arrived in Canada more than a year ago and did not apply for refugee status.
If that letter receives a negative response, several things will happen :
Remember that when you apply for asylum, you sign a Departure Order (Voluntary Departure Order); when it is enforced, you must leave.
In many cases, there is no hearing, and an officer will determine whether you truly deserve to stay, but this is very subjective.
Once you receive confirmation that the case will be referred to the CBSA, take that letter and begin the judicial review process.
The goal is that, in the face of a massive legal proceeding, a constitutional challenge—that is, a process in which lawyers in Canada seek to challenge, overturn, or repeal that law on the grounds that it violates constitutional principles.
As of the date of publication of this article, we will continue to wait and see.
I hope this topic will help clarify the process for you.
At Immiland Law Professional Corporation, we are available to review your case and determine whether we can represent you legally.
For more information, please contact us, and we'll be happy to help you with whatever you need.
With love,
Immiland Law Professional Corporation
