Umtutoni GASANA Applicant v. THE MINISTER OF IMMIGRATION, REFUGEES AND CITIZENSHIP, 2022 FC 319

Date: 20220308 Docket: IMM-2116-22 Citation: 2022 FC 319 Ottawa, Ontario, March 8, 2022 PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Pamel BETWEEN:Umtutoni GASANAApplicantandTHE MINISTER OF IMMIGRATION, REFUGEES AND CITIZENSHIPRespondent ORDER AND REASONS [1] The applicant, Ms. Umtutoni Gasana, applied on March 7, 2022, for the stay of her removal from Canada, scheduled for March 10,2022.

The Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness [Minister] – erroneously identified in the style of cause as the Ministerof Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship – asks the Court to decline to hear that motion as it has been brought too late. [2] Ms. Gasana arrived in Canada the first time as a minor in 2009 with her family. Her mother was a victim of severe domestic violenceby her husband, Ms. Gasana’s father. The family was also the subject of persecution by the Rwanda Patriotic Front [RSF].

The mother’sasylum application was denied as well as the PRRA application at the time, and the family was removed from Canada to Rwanda in2014. [3] Between 2014 and 2018, Ms. Gasana completed her studies in the United Kingdom. Upon the completion of her degree, she returnedto Rwanda but her dream of advocating for women’s rights “turned sour”, so she travelled to Canada via the United States and filed forrefugee protection in late 2018; her application for asylum was deemed inadmissible because of her previous application along with herfamily in 2009. Ms.

Gasana submitted a PRRA application in January 2019, which was denied in February 2020; judicial review of thedenial of the PRRA application was refused in October 2021. In November 2021, Ms. Gasana filed for permanent residency onhumanitarian and compassionate grounds [H&C application], an application that is still pending. Ms. Gasana fears her return to Rwandawill put her at risk due to her conversion to Christianity and political persecution, and will lead to an arranged marriage which she doesnot want. [4] Ms. Gasana is the subject of a valid deportation order.

She was served with a Direction to Report on February 4, 2022, and wasadvised on February 15, 2022, that her scheduled removal date was March 10, 2022. On February 25, 2022, she sought a deferral of herremoval, which was refused on March 1, 2022 [Negative Deferral Decision]. On March 2, 2022, Ms. Gasana filed an application for anorder in mandamus [Mandamus application], seeking to compel the Minister to render a decision on her H&C application which had beenfiled less than four months earlier. In addition, on March 7, 2022, Ms.

Gasana filed the underlying application for judicial review of therefusal to defer her deportation, along with the present motion to stay the deportation pending a decision on the underlying application aswell as a decision regarding her H&C application. [5] The Minister requests that the Court exercise its discretion not to hear the present motion on the grounds that it was only served onthe Minister at 4 p.m. yesterday, March 7, 2022, giving the Minister only 48 hours to respond before Ms.

Gasana’s removal to Rwandascheduled for 7:20 a.m. on March 10, 2022; the Minister relies on this Court’s Practice Guidelines – Immigration and RefugeeProceedings Urgent Stay Motions for Removal from Canada dated February 18, 2021 [Practice Guidelines], as well as the myriad ofdecisions from this Court confirming that last-minute requests of this nature, without valid reason, are not in the interest of justice (Berosv Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2019 FC 325; Khan v Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2018 FC 1275[Khan]; Ocaya v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), (FC); Miranda v Canada (Public Safety and EmergencyPreparedness), 2012 FC 1057). [6] I must agree with the Minister.

Ms. Gasana has been aware of her pending removal since early February. Once she received theNegative Deferral Decision, rather than immediately filing the present motion, she proceeded with filing the Mandamus application, andwaited a week before filing the present motion – serving it upon the Minister at the end of the day yesterday. [7] In a letter to this Court, Ms.

Gasana’s counsel asserts that the delay in bringing on the present request for a stay of the removal wasbecause he was on family leave between February 28, 2022, and March 4, 2022, inclusively (he had visiting family from out of town)and that he only was made aware of the Negative Deferral Decision when he returned to the office. However, counsel confirmed in hisletter to this Court that he had Ms. Gasana’s application close at hand and was working from home throughout his time away from theoffice; I note that the Mandamus application signed by Ms.

Gasana’s counsel was filed on March 2, 2022 – during the time he wasworking from home. [8] There is no doubt that the Court has the discretionary power to refuse to hear an application (Strickland v Canada (Attorney General),2015 SCC 37 at para 37, [2015] 2 SCR 713). In this case, Ms. Gasana has provided no reasonable justification for waiting nearly onemonth from the time she became aware of her pending removal to seek a stay of her removal, scheduled within the next 48 hours.

As hasbeen stated on many occasions by this Court, last-minute requests of this nature force the Minister to respond without adequatepreparation and can only serve as a strategy to put pressure on the Court and the respondent. This Court’s Practice Guidelines arepublished for a reason, and it is made clear that the Court may refuse to hear last-minute stay applications where there is no explanationfor the delay in bringing the matter forward (Khan at para 11). In this case, with no reasonable justification for the delay, to hear the

motion would constitute an unfair process. ORDER in IMM-2116-22 THIS COURT declines to hear the applicant’s motion for stay of removal. "Peter G. Pamel" Judge FEDERAL COURT SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: IMM-2116-22 STYLE OF CAUSE: UMTUTONI GASANA v THE MINISTER OF IMMIGRATION, REFUGEES AND CITIZENSHIP CONSIDERED AT OTTAWA, ONTARIO order AND REASONS: PAMEL J. DATED: march 8, 2022 WITHOUT PERSONAL APPEARANCE : Emmanuel Kamonyo For The Applicant Erin Estok For The Respondent SOLICITORS OF RECORD : Étude Légale Stewart Istvanffy Montreal (Quebec) For The Applicant Attorney General of Canada Toronto, Ontario For The Respondent