Quand voyager mène au renvoi: analyse critique de la législation canadienne sur la perte du statut de résident permanent liée à la perte de l’asile
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper provides a critical analysis of section 46(1)(c.1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) adopted in 2012. The application of this section results in the loss of permanent resident status for protected persons who lose their refugee status under section 108 of IRPA, for example by renewing their passport and travelling to their country of origin, even for a short period of time. The combined effect of sections 46(1)(c.1) and 108 of IRPA pose major issues to Canadian protected persons. As a result, this paper explains the conditions for the application of section 46(1)(c.1) of IRPA and, relying on the relevant case law and bills proposing to repeal the section, its problematic impacts. Finally, the paper presents arguments to support repealing the measure, or, at least, to mitigate its impacts.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.014 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".