• Home
  • Security & Other Inadmissibilities

Security & Other Inadmissibilities

Are you inadmissible to Canada?
Is this inadmissibility based on security, human and international rights violations or organized criminality?


The primary grounds for inadmissibility in the criminal context are set out at sections 34 – 42 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA).  With respect to inadmissibility on grounds of security (section 34), human and international rights violations (section 35) and organized criminality (section 37) we outline various considerations below. Please note that for the purposes of inadmissibility “permanent resident” refers to any individual who has acquired and not subsequently lost permanent resident status. “Foreign national” refers to any person who is not a Canadian citizen or permanent resident, and includes a stateless person.

Who is inadmissible?

Section 34

The IRPA states that inadmissibility on security grounds may result where it is determined that a permanent resident or foreign national is: engaging in an act of espionage that is against Canada or that is contrary to Canada’s interests;

a) engaging in or instigating the subversion by force of any government;

b)engaging in an act of subversion against a democratic government, institution or process as they are understood in Canada;

c) engaging in terrorism;

d) being a danger to the security of Canada;

e) engaging in acts of violence that would or might endanger the lives or safety of persons in Canada; or

f) being a member of an organization that there are reasonable grounds to believe engages, has engaged or will engage in acts referred to in paragraph (a), (b), (b.1) or (c)

Espionage under subsection 34(1)(a) refers to the practice of gathering information by spying, usually seeking information from a hostile country to benefit one’s own country. “Subversion” under subsection 34(1)(b) is the act of overturning or overthrowing a organization through illicit or improper means. “Democratic” under subsection 34(1)(b.1) refers to government by the people. Finally, “terrorism” under subsection 34(1)(c) relates to use or threats of acts of violence against persons or property with the intent of achieving some political objective.  The purpose of terrorism is, by its nature or context, understood to be to intimidate a population or to compel a government or an international organization to abstain from some action.

Section 35

Permanent residents or foreign nationals may be found to be inadmissible for human or international rights violations for the following reasons:

a) committing an act outside Canada that constitutes an offence referred to in sections 4 to 7 of the Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act;

b) being a prescribed senior official in the service of a government that, in the opinion of the Minister, engages or has engaged in terrorism, systematic or gross human rights violations, or genocide, a war crime or a crime against humanity within the meaning of subsections 6(3) to (5) of the Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act;

c) being a person, other than a permanent resident, whose entry into or stay in Canada is restricted pursuant to a decision, resolution or measure of an international organization of states or association of states, of which Canada is a member, that imposes sanctions on a country against which Canada has imposed or has agreed to impose sanctions in concert with that organization or association;

d) being a person, other than a permanent resident, who is currently the subject of an order or regulation made under section 4 of the Special Economic Measures Act on the grounds that any of the circumstances described in paragraph 4(1.1)(c) or (d) of that Act has occurred; or

e) being a person, other than a permanent resident, who is currently the subject of an order or regulation made under section 4 of the Justice for Victims of Corrupt Foreign Officials Act (Sergei Magnitsky Law).

For reference, “terrorism” under subsection 35(1)(b) holds the same definition as under 34(1)(c), as set out above. “Crimes against humanity” under subsection 35(1)(b) refers to those acts defined under section 6(3) to (5) of the Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act, including murder, extermination, torture, sexual violence and deportation committed against a civilian population or identifiable group. “Genocide” under subsection 35(1)(b) refers to actions taken to destroy an entire group of persons, as defined under international law. Finally, “war crime” under subsection 35(1)(b) refers to acts or omissions committed during an armed conflict, as defined under intentional law or conventional international law applicable to armed conflicts.

Section 37

Finally, findings of inadmissibility on grounds of organized criminality may be made against permanent residents or foreign nationals for:

a) being a member of an organization that is believed on reasonable grounds to be or to have been engaged in activity that is part of a pattern of criminal activity planned and organized by a number of persons acting in concert in furtherance of the commission of an offence punishable under an Act of Parliament by way of indictment, or in furtherance of the commission of an offence outside Canada that, if committed in Canada, would constitute such an offence, or engaging in activity that is part of such a pattern; or

b) engaging, in the context of transnational crime, in activities such as people smuggling, trafficking in persons or laundering of money or other proceeds of crime.

“Transnational crime” under subsection 37(1)(b) refers to offending that extends beyond or operates across national boundaries.

Section 42.1(1)

Please note that, pursuant to section 42.1(1) of the IRPA, following an application by a foreign national, the Minister may declare that the matters referred to in sections 34, 35 and 37 do not constitute inadmissibility in respect of a foreign national if they satisfy the Minister that it is not contrary to the national interest.

Determination Process

Assessments of whether a non-citizen fits within one of the above categories must conclude that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the acts under investigation have occurred, are occurring or may occur. This test requires that information referred to in support of the decision is specific, credible and from a reliable source.

Determinations of inadmissibility under sections 34, 35 and 37 are under the purview of the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA). Officers of the CBSA may take into consideration a variety of information in assessing inadmissibility. For findings of inadmissibility under section 34, the officer may collect the following types of evidence:

  • police or intelligence reports;
  • statutory declaration supported by evidence of statements made to an officer;
  • media articles, scholarly journal articles, expert evidence;
  • weapons or documentation in the person’s possession that indicate planned violence (for subsection 34(1)(e)); and
  • Any public information that establishes the propensity for violent acts by the individual.

For assessments under section 35, officers may collect any of the following information:

  • Statutory declaration supported by evidence that establish that the person concerned committed an act that constitutes a war crime as defined under international law;
  • Evidence that the act committed is contrary to international law or convention; and
  • Media articles, scholarly journal articles, expert evidence.

Finally, for assessments under section 37, officers of the CBSA may collect the following types of evidence:

  • police or intelligence reports;
  • statutory declaration supported by evidence of statements made to an officer;
  • proof that the alleged organization is involved in criminal activity; and
  • media articles, scholarly journal articles, expert evidence.

Overcoming Inadmissibility on These Grounds

Findings of inadmissibility under sections 34, 35 and 37 have serious ramifications as there is no right of appeal for permanent residents or foreign nationals under subsection 64(1) of the IRPA. These decisions may be challenged to the Federal Court of Canada in some instances. Please contact our office for further information and how we may be able to address inadmissibility under sections 34, 35, and 37 of the IRPA.

Contact Us

Inadmissibility Testimonials

Important Immigration Court Decisions


What Our Clients Are Saying
CHERRIE CHAWLA
CHERRIE CHAWLA
I had a Zoom consultation with Mr. Bellissimo, and he was incredibly kind and professional. He took the time to explain my case thoroughly and provided valuable insights. I truly appreciated his honesty in advising me that I didn’t need to hire his team since my case was straightforward. Highly recommend for anyone seeking genuine and knowledgeable legal advice!
Shiv Shankar
Shiv Shankar
Voila has assessed my case in professional way and provided us with the best possible solutions.I highly appreciate their professionalism and recommend for Immigration related assistance.
Shosho Mosaferi
Shosho Mosaferi
I want to share my exceptional experience with Bellissimo Law Group PC. Their expertise in immigration law is truly remarkable, and Mr. Bellissimo’s extensive track record of successful cases speaks for itself. A quick Google search reveals his numerous achievements and contributions to the field.Mr. Bellissimo has unparalleled knowledge and specialization in immigration law, further evidenced by his extensive publications on the subject. His books and resources have been invaluable to many navigating complex immigration matters.The entire team at Bellissimo Law Group is highly professional, dedicated, and detail-oriented. Without hesitation, I can confidently say that Mr. Bellissimo and his team are among the best in the field. They provide comprehensive, personalized pathways for immigration and other legal matters, ensuring the best possible outcomes.I highly recommend Bellissimo Law Group PC to anyone seeking expert legal advice or representation for their immigration or related cases.
Hamed Amin
Hamed Amin
Mr. Bellissimo and his impeccable team truly stand out for their professionalism. Even before my consultation, I was confident that my questions would be answered in the best possible way. Rarely do you find a law firm where the principal and team have published specialized books with reputable publishers in their field of practice. This ensures their service is a genuine blend of theory and practice, providing you with the most accurate, scientific, and desirable results.The name Bellissimo is truly one of a kind in this industry.Beyond their exceptional legal advice, they welcome you with the utmost respect and kindness, making you feel truly valued like a member of a family.I would also like to extend my heartfelt gratitude to Ms. Athena Portokalidis for her patience and support alongside Mr. Bellissimo.Once again, I appreciate your high level of knowledge, expertise, and ethics in your field.
Ellyn Jung
Ellyn Jung
I've only had a consultation at this point, but everyone from the response to my initial inquiry through the actual appointment has been very approachable and helpful. If we decide to proceed, I'll be very comfortable booking their services.
Diego Mancilla
Diego Mancilla
Mitzi Moran
Mitzi Moran
A consultation was scheduled very quickly. Staff member was polite, efficient, practical, and knowledgeable. Thank you!
pratik thaker
pratik thaker
We had great experience working with team of Bellissimo Law Group. They are the best in what they do and were able to get us successful H&C application result. i would highly recommend anyone having immigration needs, please reach out, they are expert and know what they are doing. Thank you team for all the efforts you put in our case.