Immigrants, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) employs technology to speed up application processing, but experts have warned that it could cause more problems than it solves.
Mario Bellissimo, immigration lawyer and founder of Bellissimo Law Group PC, described IRCC's use of AI as “inevitable” and “a complimentary development.”
“The main advantage is efficiency. It reduces processing time, triage everyday cases more effectively, allowing executives to focus their efforts on more complex issues. For example, automating spouse sponsorship and temporary resident visa applications has significantly reduced evaluation times. ”
However, while automation has helped to reduce processing time, these benefits raise issues regarding fairness and potential bias in decision-making.
Efficiency vs. fairness
Mario Bellissimo (bellissimolawgroup.com) | Petra Molner (submitted)
However, Bellissimo points out some serious issues, including an overreliance on technology.
“One notable example involves reasons for rejection generated with the exact same timestamps that the application was processed, raising legitimate concerns about whether substantial human reviews occurred,” he said.
In an email to Daily Hive, an IRCC spokesman said “Artificial intelligence will not make a final decision,” and that the tool will not reject or reject the application.
“Immigrants, refugees, citizenship Canada (IRCC) Use advanced analytics tools to help you sort your applications based on the rules you set up. These tools rely on machine learning to find patterns in past decisions. ”
But that's exactly these patterns Petra Molner's question.
Author of The wall has an eye: the movement of survival in the age of artificial intelligence Molner, associate director of York University's Institute of Refugee Law, warns that relying on past decisions could perpetuate bias and lead to unfair outcomes.
“Technology is not neutral,” she said.
She added that using technology without proper supervision presents a risk of oversimplifying complex cases such as refugees and asylum seekers.
“Automation replicates structural and systemic racism, and applicants rarely communicate how decisions about their lives are being made,” she said.
The IRCC argues that advanced analytical tools are continuously reviewed by employees, ensuring that results are consistent with applications that receive full human reviews.
“Identifying and mitigating potential bias or discriminatory effects is always a critical focus for designing, developing and implementing technology,” the IRCC website states.
Seeking transparency
Evgenia Parajanian/Shutterstock
Experts also highlight the lack of transparency in the way IRCC uses technology to handle applications.
Bellissimo recalled when he learned to the public that the IRCC had introduced tools like Chinook without disclosure or consultation. Information is information that was only revealed through access to information requests. However, in a 2022 statement, the IRCC said Chinook will extract information from the application to create a clear, user-friendly format for executives.
Belissimo has long advocated for greater transparency.
In 2022 he submitted a brief to the House Standing Committee on Civil Rights, suggesting measures such as passing laws governing the use of AI, establishing professional training for staff, and conducting independent external audits with enforcement.
“The essence of the brief was that without legal guardrails, AI risked replicating historical patterns of discrimination within Canadian immigration,” he explained.
Belissimo ensures that technology is used responsibly, and said immigration advocates should be treated as partners rather than watchdogs.
Molner also points out that Canada is increasingly dependent on private companies for automated immigration and border management tools. She noted that these partnerships are opaque and opaque due to private agreements that make it almost impossible for lawyers and applicants to find out how decisions will be made.
“Canada could be a leader in rights-based innovation, but now the use of automated decision-making systems in immigration appears to be more of an experiment on vulnerable groups than just the fairness or mere reform of the system that desperately needs it,” she said.
