Bill C-12, the Strengthening Canada's Immigration System and Borders Act, received Royal Assent on March 26, 2026. Here is what changed, who is affected, what advocates are saying, and a practitioner's honest assessment.
On March 26, 2026, Bill C-12 received Royal Assent and became law. Officially titled the Strengthening Canada's Immigration System and Borders Act, it represents the most significant structural change to Canada's asylum and immigration framework since Bill C-31 in 2012.
This article breaks down what the law does, who it affects, and an honest assessment from a practitioner's perspective.
What Is Bill C-12?
Bill C-12 was introduced by the Carney government on October 8, 2025. It was extracted from the broader Bill C-2 (the "Strong Borders Act") to fast-track immigration-specific provisions through Parliament. The bill moved from first reading to Royal Assent in under six months.
The political context matters. The bill arrived during sustained pressure from the Trump administration, which accused Canada of failing to control its border. Canada's $1.3 billion Border Plan, of which C-12 is a component, was designed in part to demonstrate credible border management to the United States.
Have Questions About Immigration?
Our team of experts is here to help you plan your move to Canada.
This is the most contested part of the law. Two new rules now determine whether an asylum claim even gets heard by the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB):
The One-Year Rule: If you entered Canada after June 24, 2020, and you file an asylum claim more than one year after your first entry, your claim is ineligible for referral to the IRB. This applies regardless of whether you left and re-entered Canada. It applies to everyone, including people on valid study permits and work permits.
The 14-Day Rule: If you entered Canada irregularly across the Canada-US land border and waited more than 14 days to file your claim, it is also ineligible for IRB referral.
Both rules apply to all claims made on or after June 3, 2025, giving them a retroactive character.
What happens instead? People caught by these rules are not removed immediately. They receive a Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (PRRA), a written process administered by IRCC officers. But the PRRA is not the IRB. There is no oral hearing, no right to testify in person, no appeal to the Refugee Appeal Division, and historically lower approval rates.
Unaccompanied minors are exempt from both rules.
2. Mass Document Cancellation Powers
The Governor in Council (Cabinet) now has authority to:
Cancel, suspend, or vary immigration documents (work permits, study permits, visitor visas, PR visas, eTAs) for entire classes of holders at once
Cease accepting new applications, pause processing, or terminate applications outright
Impose or change conditions on temporary residents
The trigger is "public interest," which includes fraud, administrative error, or concerns for public health, safety, or national security. Decisions require Cabinet approval and must be published in the Canada Gazette. However, individual document holders are not required to receive direct notice, and no individual appeal mechanism is established within the legislation.
3. Information Sharing
IRCC gains explicit legal authority to share personal information (identity, immigration status, documents) within the department and with federal, provincial, and territorial government partners. Sharing with external parties requires written agreements. Provinces cannot share IRCC data with other countries without IRCC permission.
4. Asylum System Modernization
The process requires claims to be submitted online. Only complete, "schedule-ready" claims are referred to the IRB. The IRB decides on claims only while the claimant is physically present in Canada. Removal orders take effect the same day a claim is voluntarily withdrawn.
Who Is Affected?
Asylum Seekers and Refugees
The one-year bar creates what critics describe as a "two-tier" system:
Track 1 (full protection): Claimants who filed within one year of entry get a full IRB hearing with an oral hearing, the right to appeal to the Refugee Appeal Division, and Federal Court judicial review.
Track 2 (reduced protection): Claimants caught by the one-year or 14-day rule get only a PRRA, a paper-based review with no oral hearing, no appeal, and lower approval rates.
International Students and Temporary Foreign Workers
The one-year clock starts from the date of first entry after June 24, 2020, not the date fear of persecution arose. A student who arrived in 2022 and later developed a genuine need for protection faces an eligibility bar before the IRB ever considers the merits of their case.
The mass cancellation powers also create uncertainty. Study permits could theoretically be cancelled for entire classes of holders if IRCC found fraud patterns in an institution or visa category.
Start-Up Visa Applicants
With roughly 42,200 backlogged applications and nearly 80% of designated business incubators failing updated compliance standards, the cancellation powers give IRCC the legal basis to clear this backlog in bulk. Applicants could lose years of investment with no individual review.
LGBTQ+ Asylum Seekers
Rainbow Railroad specifically condemned Bill C-12, noting that the one-year filing deadline is incompatible with the reality of coming out. For people fleeing countries where homosexuality is criminalized, disclosing their identity to a government tribunal can take years. The law does not account for this.
Survivors of Gender-Based Violence
Survivors of domestic violence, sexual violence, and torture often cannot disclose the full nature of their persecution until they are in a stable environment. The PRRA provides no oral hearing, meaning these claimants have no opportunity to describe their experiences in a setting where their testimony and emotional responses can be assessed.
The Legislative Timeline
Date
Stage
June 2025
Bill C-2 (Strong Borders Act) introduced. 300+ organizations demand withdrawal.
October 8, 2025
Bill C-12 introduced (extracted from C-2). First reading.
October 23, 2025
Second reading. Referred to committee.
Nov. 4-25, 2025
Five committee meetings.
December 11, 2025
Third reading passes House of Commons.
December 23, 2025
House holds extraordinary sitting to adopt C-12.
February 5, 2026
Senate second reading.
February 25, 2026
Senate committee reports bill without amendments.
March 12, 2026
Senate passes third reading.
March 26, 2026
Royal Assent. Bill C-12 becomes law.
What Advocates Are Saying
A coalition of 27 organizations led by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association condemned the bill's passage. The coalition includes Amnesty International Canada, the Canadian Council for Refugees, the Canadian Muslim Lawyers Association, Doctors of the World Canada, and the Women's Legal Education and Action Fund (LEAF).
The CCLA stated:
"This egregious bill marks a significant attack on refugee and migrant rights in Canada. Bill C-12 will put thousands of individuals at risk of persecution, violence and precarity."
The Canadian Bar Association, in a formal submission and open letter to Senators, wrote:
"The one-year ineligibility rule appears arbitrary and without legal justification. Decades of jurisprudence have emphasized the need for individualized assessments in refugee determinations and established that delay in advancing a claim should not, in itself, unequivocally undermine one's ability to receive a Charter-mandated hearing."
The CBA specifically warned that the bill "contains flaws that open it to constitutional challenge" and that proposed solutions "run a serious risk of exacerbating rather than alleviating existing problems."
The Canadian Immigration Lawyers Association stated:
"The fairness that was once a hallmark of Canada's immigration system has been eroded, and this new law changes that for many people."
Rainbow Railroad:
"For LGBTQI+ asylum seekers, whose safety often depends on privacy, trust, and time to disclose their identities, Bill C-12 replaces compassion with control."
The UN Human Rights Committee called on Canada to "ensure that all persons seeking international protection have unfettered access to the national territory and to fair and efficient procedures, with all necessary procedural safeguards."
The Government's Position
The government's rationale rests on four points:
System integrity: The asylum system has significant backlogs. The government argues some claims are fraudulent, with consultants counselling students and temporary residents into making asylum claims as a backdoor immigration strategy.
Border security: Canada's relationship with the US requires demonstrable border management. The $1.3 billion Border Plan, including C-12, is designed to address US pressure.
Modern tools: Immigration fraud has become more complex. Updated authorities for document cancellation and information sharing are needed.
Transparency: Mass cancellation decisions require Cabinet approval, Canada Gazette publication, and reporting to Parliament.
A Practitioner's Perspective
As an RCIC who works with clients navigating the Canadian immigration system daily, I want to offer a direct assessment of what this law means in practice.
The Timing Bar Is Fundamentally Flawed
Putting a timer on refugee protection is illogical to the core of what protection means. Refugee protection exists because a person faces persecution. The need for that protection does not expire after 12 months. It does not become less real because the person held a study permit or work permit during that time.
For years, the accepted practice was that a person on valid temporary status had no reason to fear return and therefore had no obligation to claim refugee status during that time. Temporary status gives the claimant an assumption of protection. The clock does not start running until that protection ends.
Bill C-12 takes this reasoning and turns it against the people it was meant to protect. The temporary status that once justified not claiming early is now the basis for denying a hearing entirely. A student who arrived in 2023, studied for two years, and then saw their home country descend into civil war in 2025 is now barred from a full IRB hearing because their one-year window closed while they were in class.
What About New Protection Needs?
The law fails to account for situations where the need for protection arises during a person's time in Canada. Consider someone who became a political activist while living here. They were not a refugee when they arrived. Their country's government changed, or they publicly criticized the regime online, or they came out as LGBTQ+ after feeling safe for the first time in their lives. Their need for protection is real, current, and verifiable. But the one-year clock started the day they first walked through customs, long before any of this happened.
The right questions to ask are: when did fear crystallize, when was the person first able to claim, and why didn't they claim at that point? Bill C-12 asks none of these questions. It asks only one: how many days since entry?
Balancing Integrity and Protection
I understand the need to protect the integrity of the system from false claims. Every practitioner does. Fraudulent claims consume resources that should go to people with genuine protection needs. Backlogs hurt everyone.
But the answer to system abuse cannot be a blanket timing bar that catches genuine refugees alongside fraudulent claimants. The IRB already has tools to assess credibility. Decision-makers can already weigh delay as one factor among many. What the IRB needed was more resources, more members, and faster processing, not a rule that removes its jurisdiction over an entire category of claimants and sends them to a paper-based process with lower approval rates.
Constitutional challenges are coming. There are strong arguments under both Section 7 (life, liberty, and security) and Section 15 (equality) of the Charter. The question is not whether the challenges will be filed, but how long the litigation will take and how many people will be harmed in the interim.
What You Should Do Now
If You Are on Temporary Status and May Need Protection
If you entered Canada after June 24, 2020, and you have a genuine fear of persecution in your home country, do not wait. The one-year clock may have already expired for you. Consult an RCIC or immigration lawyer immediately to assess your options. A PRRA is still available, but the protections are significantly reduced compared to a full IRB hearing.
If You Hold a Work Permit or Study Permit
The mass cancellation powers are broad but have not yet been exercised. Monitor IRCC announcements and Canada Gazette publications. If your program or institution comes under scrutiny, seek advice early.
If You Are a Start-Up Visa Applicant
With 42,200 backlogged applications and sweeping new cancellation powers, the SUV program is in a precarious position. Assess whether your designated organization meets current compliance standards. Consider alternative immigration pathways.
If You Are a Permanent Resident
PR visas are technically within the scope of documents subject to government orders. The government frames this as targeting fraud and security concerns, not lawful residents. Maintain your documentation and residency obligation compliance.
Key Takeaways
Bill C-12 became law on March 26, 2026, after moving through Parliament in under six months.
The one-year asylum bar and 14-day rule create a two-tier system where timing of claim, not merit, determines the level of procedural protection.
Mass document cancellation powers allow the government to cancel work permits, study permits, and visas for entire classes of holders without individual notice.
A 27-organization coalition including the CCLA, Amnesty International, and the Canadian Bar Association has condemned the law.
Constitutional challenges are widely anticipated on Section 7 and Section 15 Charter grounds.
If you may need refugee protection and entered Canada after June 24, 2020, consult a professional immediately.
This article reflects the professional opinion of Go Far Global and is intended for informational purposes. It does not constitute legal advice. If you need advice specific to your situation, contact us for a consultation.
Sources: Canada.ca (Bill C-12 official notices), Parliament of Canada (LEGISinfo), Canadian Bar Association (formal submissions and open letter to Senators), CCLA (press releases and submissions), Amnesty International Canada, Rainbow Railroad, Canadian Immigration Lawyers Association, Canadian Council for Refugees, IRB Chairperson's Guideline 9, UN Human Rights Committee.
Disclaimer
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute immigration or legal advice. Immigration laws and policies change frequently. Each case is unique and outcomes depend on individual circumstances. Consult a Regulated Canadian Immigration Consultant (RCIC) before making immigration decisions.
Sources & References
•Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) – canada.ca/immigration
•College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants (CICC) – college-ic.ca
Rami Mamar
Regulated Canadian Immigration Consultant
RCIC-IRB #R515110Commissioner of Oaths
Rami Mamar is an RCIC-IRB licensed immigration consultant and Commissioner of Oaths with over a decade of experience helping clients from Iran, UAE, Syria, Armenia, and worldwide immigrate to Canada. He has overseen 10,000+ immigration cases including Express Entry, work permits, study permits, and family sponsorship applications.
