More than advocates: Lawyers' role in efficient refugee status determination

Abstract

For years, Canadian refugee status determination (RSD) procedures have faced significant administrative capacity issues. Arguing that the RSD system was attracting "unfounded" claims and becoming inefficient, the Harper government pursued rights-restrictive reforms. Is there a connection between applicants' procedural rights and the efficiency of Canadian RSD? This article outlines and empirically tests arguments for and against restricting refugee applicants' procedural rights to enhance efficiency.Examining macro-level trends in applications and microlevel adjudicator-specific routines, it presents evidence against the notion that rights-restrictive measures save adjudicators time. The article also shows that procedural rights can foster efficient RSD practices when applicants and adjudicators have access to competent legal counsel. SommaireDurant des années, les procédures canadiennes touchant à la détermination du statut de réfugié (DSR) ont dû affronter d'importants problèmes de capacité administrative. Selon l'argument que le système de la DSR attirait des réclamations « non fondées » et devenait inefficace, le gouvernement Harper a poursuivi des réformes restrictives des droits. Existe-t-il un lien entre les droits