Annual Report on the International Transfer of Offenders 2009-2010

Preface

The following report provides a statistical overview on the International Transfer of Offenders program's activities over the last ten years.

The data is from the Correctional Service Canada's (CSC) International Transfers Database and the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade. The source of the statistics is indicated under each chart, table or figure. The data is reported by fiscal year (from April 1 to March 31 of the following year).

Readers are advised that, in some instances, figures have been revised from earlier annual reports.

The report is prepared by the International Transfers Unit of the Correctional Service Canada.

Introduction

At any given time, there are over 1800 Canadian citizens incarcerated throughout the world. Canadians serving a sentence of imprisonment abroad are faced with serious problems such as isolation, culture shock, language barriers and have no means to address the root of their problems because of the lack of programs available to foreign nationals. To contribute to the administration of justice, the rehabilitation of offenders and their reintegration into the community, Canada has entered into international transfer agreements with over 111 countries and territories through 16 bilateral treaties, and three multi-lateral schemes; the Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons, the Scheme for the Transfer of Convicted Offenders within the Commonwealth and the Inter-American Convention on Serving Criminal Sentences Abroad. These agreements enable persons who have been convicted abroad and sentenced to imprisonment, a term of conditional release or any other form of community supervision in the territory of the other party to serve their foreign imposed sentence in their country of citizenship, with their explicit consent. Along with Canada's implementing legislation International Transfers of Offenders Act (ITOA), these agreements are the legal basis for effecting international transfers. Without the benefit of transfers, offenders are deported at the end of their sentence to their country of citizenship, often after having spent years in confinement and being totally unprepared for a safe, secure and successful reintegration into society. Transfers provide offenders with the possibility of becoming productive members of the community, by contributing to the administration of justice and the rehabilitation of offender and their reintegration into society as law abiding citizens.

The International Transfers of Offenders Act

The International Transfer of Offenders Act (ITOA) is an Act to implement treaties and administrative arrangements on the international transfer of persons found guilty of criminal offences. The ITOA was enacted in 2004 and replaced the Transfer of Offenders Act (TOA), which had been in force since 1978.

The Minister of Public Safety is responsible for the administration of the Act and is the sole authority for decisions. The Director Institutional Reintegration Operations has the delegated authority from the Minister to administer the Act.

Eligibility for transfer is based on citizenship and dual criminality in the receiving country. Decisions based on criteria enounced in the ITOA and consent from the three (3) parties, i.e. receiving country (country of citizenship), sentencing country and the offender, must be obtained prior to effecting a transfer. Special transfers or administrative arrangements can be made for mentally disordered persons or with a country where there is no treaty in force. To date, no transfers have been made under an administrative arrangement.

Purpose of the International Transfers Program

The purpose of this program is to contribute to the administration of justice and the rehabilitation of offenders and their reintegration into the community by enabling them to serve their sentence in their country of citizenship. It also alleviates undue hardships borne by offenders and their families. Once transferred, the offender's sentence is administered in accordance with the laws and the procedures of the country of citizenship. With very few exceptions, if offenders are not transferred, they will ultimately be deported to their country of citizenship, without correctional supervision/jurisdiction and without the benefit of programming.

International Transfers History

The first transfer of offenders took place in 1978 shortly after the implementation of a bilateral treaty between Canada and the United States of America on the transfer of offenders. This first transfer included the return to Canada of twenty nine (29) Canadian citizens and the repatriation of forty (40) American citizens.

Section A Transfers from 1978 to 2010

Since the first transfer that occurred in 1978, until March 31, 2010, 1658 offenders were transferred pursuant to an agreement on the International Transfer of Offenders. Of these, 1531 Canadians were transferred to Canada, whereas the remaining 127 consisted of foreign nationals who were repatriated to their country of citizenship.

Transfers to Canada from Foreign Countries

The majority of the 1531 Canadian citizens transferred to Canada were effected from the United States, specifically 78.6% (1203 offenders). Consequently, Canada and the United States have agreed to four (4) set transfers per year. The second largest number of repatriations is from Mexico with 3.98% (61 offenders), followed by the United Kingdom at 2.35% (36 offenders), Peru 2.16% (33 offenders), and Trinidad and Tobago at 1.44% (22 offenders).

The following chart illustrates the number of international transfers to Canada effected over the last ten fiscal years. For detailed information regarding which countries are involved in the international transfers, refer to Annex A.

Figure A1: Transfers to Canada
Fiscal year that transfer was effected
1999 - 2000 2000 - 2001 2001 - 2002 2002 - 2003 2003 - 2004 2004 - 2005 2005 - 2006 2006 - 2007 2007 - 2008 2008 - 2009 2009 - 2010
Number of offenders transfered 70 84 96 80 98 79 90 53 71 82 27

Source: International Transfers Database

Transfers from Canada to Foreign Countries

The following chart illustrates the number of international transfers from Canada to Foreign Countries since 1978 by receiving country.

Figure A2: Transfers from Canada to Foreign Countries
United States Netherlands France United Kingdom Other Countries
Transferred from Canada to foreign countries since 1978 108 8 3 3 5

Of the 127 offenders transferred from Canada to foreign countries since 1978, 85% (108) were American citizens. Transfers to other foreign countries are as follows: Netherlands 6.3% (8), the United Kingdom and France 2.4% (3) and to other countries 4% (5). Annex B details all transfers from Canada to foreign countries from 1978‑1979 to 2009‑2010.

Source: International Transfers Database

Section B Applications for transfers

At any given time, there are over 300 applications being processed by the International Transfers Unit with an additional average of 250 new applications received each year.

The following table identifies the total caseload in the given fiscal year. The statistics include the number of new applications received per fiscal year in addition to the number of applications carried over from the previous fiscal year, for which a final decision had not yet been rendered.

Table B1: Flow-Through of Applications
Fiscal Year Number of applications carried over from previous year Number of new applications received Total caseload
2004 - 2005 346 264 610
2005 - 2006 350 259 609
2006 - 2007 242 262 504
2007 - 2008 298 268 566
2008 - 2009 306 288 594
2009 - 2010 322 213 535

Source: International Transfers Database

Table B2: Applications to and from Canada
Fiscal Year Number of new applications received from Canada to Canada
2004 - 2005 264 8 256
2005 - 2006 259 7 252
2006 - 2007 262 3 259
2007 - 2008 268 9 259
2008 - 2009 288 5 283
2009 - 2010 213 4 209

Source: International Transfers Database

As of January 2010, there were approximately 1808 Canadian offenders known to be incarcerated abroad, of whom 1616 were eligible for transfer to Canada. Moreover, there were 901 foreign national offenders under the jurisdiction of CSC, 304 who were eligible for transfer to their country of citizenship. As of March 31, 2010, only four (4) foreign national offenders had submitted an application for transfer to their country of citizenship and 209 Canadian citizens applied to transfer to Canada.

Section C Processing Timeframes

Time between Receipt of Sentencing Documentation and the Minister's Decision

The International Transfers Unit is committed to processing international transfer applications within a reasonable timeframe from the date of receipt of the sentencing documentation (i.e. judgment, summary of facts and sentencing documentation) from the foreign country to obtaining the Minister's decision. With the advent of new countries signing agreements, the complexity of the cases and the increasing number of applications being received, these timeframes may fluctuate greatly. Factors such as incomplete documentation, complex cases and translation of documents have a direct impact on timeframes.

The following chart illustrates the average processing time in months from the time the sentencing documentation is received until a Canadian decision is rendered.

Figure C1: Average Processing Timeframes
Fiscal Year in which Sentencing documentation received
1999 - 2000 2000 - 2001 2001 - 2002 2002 - 2003 2003 - 2004 2004 - 2005 2005 - 2006 2006 - 2007 2007 - 2008 2008 - 2009 2009 - 2010
Average in Months from Receipt of Sentencing Documentation to the Ministers Decision 9.35 6.61 6.07 4.92 6.52 3.84 7.76 9.38 11.27 12.09 10.49

Source: International Transfers Database

Of the 1260 cases for which the sentencing documentation was received between April 1, 1999 and March 31, 2010, 51.03% (643 cases) were processed in less than six months time. These processing timeframes are from the time the sentencing documentation is received until a Minister's decision is rendered.

In 16.83% of the cases (212 cases), the processing was completed between six (6) to (9) months.

In approximately 32.14% of the cases (405 cases), the processing took more than nine months due to a number of issues such as complexity of the application, incomplete sentencing documentation, etc.

Figure C2: Processing Timeframes
  < 6 months between 6 and 9 months > 9 months
Average time required to process an application 643 212 405

Source: International Transfers Database

Timeframe between Decisions and the Transfer

Once an offender's request to transfer is approved by the Minister of Public Safety and the foreign country, the International Transfers Unit initiates the coordination of the offender's repatriation. It should be noted that this timeframe is dependant upon receipt of the foreign country's approval, the offender's consent and the time required to organize the transfer. With the advent of new countries signing agreements, these timeframes may fluctuate.

The following chart illustrates the average time (in months) required to effect a transfer from the time both countries have approved. The chart illustrates the data by fiscal year.

Figure C3: Timeframe to effect the Transfer following both approvals
Fisical Year Transfer Effected
1999 - 2000 2000 - 2001 2001 - 2002 2002 - 2003 2003 - 2004 2004 - 2005 2005 - 2006 2006 - 2007 2007 - 2008 2008 - 2009 2009 - 2010
Average in months from both countries decisions to effect a transfer 1.11 1.68 1.47 1.25 1.29 2.46 2.62 2.81 2.81 2.36 2.42

Source: International Transfers Database

Section D Outcome of applications

Results of Applications Processed

During the last five years, from 2005-2006 to 2009-2010, 1290 new applications for transfer were received for analysis and processing. Of those 1290 applications, to date, 17.75% (229) have resulted in a transfer, while 46.35% (598) were denied. Only 6.03% (65) offenders have withdrawn their application during that same period. The remainder of the applications are still in process or have been closed for a variety of reasons (release from institution, ineligibility).

The tables below indicate the number of applications received during a fiscal year which resulted in a transfer, a denial or a withdrawal. The results of applications will fluctuate as decisions and transfers do not necessarily take place the same year that applications were received.

Table D1: Applications received during past 5 years resulting in a transfer
Application received in Fiscal Year # of Applications received # that resulted in Transfers
# %
2005 - 2006 259 74 28.57
2006 - 2007 262 64 24.43
2007 - 2008 268 64 23.88
2008 - 2009 288 26 9.02
2009 - 2010 213 1 0.46
Total : 1290 229 17.75

Source: International Transfers Database

Table D2: Applications received during past 5 years resulting in a denial
Application received in Fiscal Year # of Applications received # that resulted in a Denial by either Country
# %
2005 - 2006 259 133 51.35
2006 - 2007 262 147 56.11
2007 - 2008 268 138 51.49
2008 - 2009 288 127 44.09
2009 - 2010 213 53 24.88
Total : 1290 598 46.35

Source: International Transfers Database

Table D3: Applications received during past 5 years resulting in a withdrawal
Application received Fiscal Year # of Applications received # of Applications that resulted in a withdrawal by the offender
# %
2005 - 2006 259 18 6.95
2006 - 2007 262 13 4.96
2007 - 2008 268 14 5.22
2008 - 2009 288 17 5.90
2009 - 2010 213 3 1.40
Total : 1290 65 5.03

Source: International Transfers Database

Applications Denied

Of the applications received during the last ten (10) fiscal years, 1167 applications resulted in a denial by either the Foreign Country or by Canada. As demonstrated in table D4 below, a small percentage of cases were denied by Canada.

Table D4: Applications denied – Canada vs Foreign Country
Applications received during Fiscal Year Number of applications that resulted in a denial Number/Percentage by Foreign Countries Number/Percentage by Canada
# % # %
1999 - 2000 67 67 100 0 0
2000 - 2001 81 81 100 0 0
2001 - 2002 88 88 100 0 0
2002 - 2003 100 100 100 0 0
2003 - 2004 113 110 97 3 3
2004 - 2005 120 110 92 10 8
2005 - 2006 133 107 80 26 20
2006 - 2007 147 106 72 41 28
2007 - 2008 138 94 68 44 32
2008 - 2009 127 95 75 32 25
2009 - 2010 53 53 100 0 0
Total : 1167 1011 87% 156 13%

Source: International Transfers Database

Denials by the foreign countries were based on a series of factors such as dual citizenship, law enforcement concerns, lack of a removal order (for deportation), unpaid restitution, divergence of parole eligibility.

The following chart illustrates in percentage the denials by Canada vs Foreign Countries between April 1, 1999 and March 31, 2010.

Figure D5: Denial of Applications – Canada vs Foreign Country
  Denied by Foreign Country Denied by Canada
Denials during the last ten fisical years 87% 13%

Source: International Transfers Database

Section E Canadian Decisions Rendered by the Minister

In determining whether to consent to the transfer of a Canadian offender, the Minister of Public Safety must take into consideration a number of factors listed in section 10 of the International Transfer of Offenders Act:

10.1(a) whether the offender's return to Canada would constitute a threat to the security of Canada;
10.1(b) whether the offender left or remained outside Canada with the intention of abandoning Canada as their place of permanent residence;
10.1(c) whether the offender has social or family ties in Canada;
10.1(d) whether the foreign entity or its prison system presents a serious threat to the offender's security or human rights;
10.2(a) whether, in the Minister's opinion, the offender will, after the transfer, commit a terrorism offence or criminal organization offence within the meaning of section 2 of the Criminal Code; and
10.2(b) whether the offender was previously transferred under this Act or the Transfer of Offenders Act, chapter T-15 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1985.

** During the last 10 years, CSC has sent an average of 115 applications per year to the Minister's office for decision. Not all files returned with a decision, as some offenders withdraw their application prior to a decision being rendered, the foreign country may deny the application, and/or the offender may have been released.

The following table indicates the number of decisions rendered by the Minister during the past 10 fiscal years. The numbers include both offender requesting a transfer to Canada, and those requesting a transfer from Canada.

Table E1: Decisions rendered by the Minister
Fiscal Year Number of Decisions Rendered Applications approved Applications denied
# % # %
1999 - 2000 90 90 100 % 0 0
2000 - 2001 101 101 100 % 0 0
2001 - 2002 105 105 100 % 0 0
2002 - 2003 105 108 100 % 0 0
2003 - 2004 98 98 100 % 0 0
2004 - 2005 202 202 100 % 0 0
2005 - 2006 110 108 98 % 2 2 %
2006 - 2007 86 62 72% 24 28 %
2007 - 2008 143 100 70 % 43 30 %
2008 - 2009 109 86 79 % 23 21 %
2009 - 2010 89 24 27 % 65 73 %
Total : 1238 1081 87 % 157 13 %

Source: International Transfers Database

Of the decisions rendered between April 1, 1999 and March 31, 2010, 157 denials were handed down by the Minister of Public Safety.

NoteNot all applications approved by Canada for any given reporting year resulted in an actual transfer for several possible reasons. Among them, the foreign country did not approve the transfer, the transfer took place the subsequent reporting year, the offender withdrew the transfer application following an approval by Canada, the offender died, and or the offender was released from custody by the foreign country.

The following chart illustrates the reasons of the denials (in percentage) handed down by the Minister of Public Safety between April 1, 1999 and March 31, 2010. These are based on factors listed in section 10 of the International Transfer of Offenders Act:

Figure E2: Reasons for denials based on articles of legislation
  Section 10.1(a) Section 10.1(b) Section 10.1(c) Section 10.1(d) Section 10.2(a)
Reasons for denials based on ITOA in percentage 28% 23% 13% 0.4% 35%

Source: International Transfers Database

The majority of these denials were based either on section 10.2(a) of the ITOA, "whether, in the Minister's opinion, the offender will, after the transfer, commit a terrorism offence or criminal organization offence within the meaning of section 2 of the Criminal Code" and/or section 10.1(a) of the ITOA, "whether the offender's return to Canada would constitute a threat to the security of Canada".

There were no denials based on 10.2(b) "whether the offender was previously transferred under this Act or the Transfer of Offenders Act, chapter T‑15 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1985."

Figure E3: Denials – by offence type

The following chart illustrates the denials by Canada by types of offences.

Drug: includes possession, trafficking, attempt to possess, import, export

Person: includes homicide, attempted murder, murder, manslaughter, sexual assault, sexual offences, uttering threats

Property: includes theft, break & enter, fraud, mischief, and possession of stolen property

Other: impaired driving, fail to appear, breach

Figure E3: Denials – by offence type
  Drug Person Property Other
Denials by Canada in the last 10 years by types of offences 63% 29% 5% 3%

Source: International Transfers Database

Section F Transfers

Transfers to Canada

The following table represents the breakdown of offenders who have transferred to Canada, those that were transferred to Federal custody vs those transferred to provincial jurisdiction**.

** Provincial jurisdiction means those offenders sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 2 years less 1 day. They can include sentences of probations, and juvenile delinquents.

Table F1: Transfers to Canada – by provincial vs federal
Fiscal Year in which transfer was effected # of offenders transferred to Federal jurisdiction # of offenders transferred to Provincial jurisdiction Total # of offenders transferred
1999 - 2000 64 6 70
2000 - 2001 79 5 84
2001 - 2002 86 10 96
2002 - 2003 78 2 80
2003 - 2004 93 5 98
2004 - 2005 73 6 79
2005 - 2006 88 2 90
2006 - 2007 48 5 53
2007 - 2008 70 1 71
2008 - 2009 79 3 82
2009 - 2010 27 0 27
Total 785 45 830

Source: International Transfers Database

Table F2: Transfers to Canada (last 10 years) – by gender
Fiscal Year # of Male offenders transferred # of Female offenders transferred Total # of offenders transferred
1999 - 2000 59 11 70
2000 - 2001 60 24 84
2001 - 2002 82 14 96
2002 - 2003 73 7 80
2003 - 2004 87 11 98
2004 - 2005 62 17 79
2005 - 2006 79 11 90
2006 - 2007 47 6 53
2007 - 2008 62 9 71
2008 - 2009 65 17 82
2009 - 2010 23 4 27
Total 699 131 830

Source: International Transfers Database

Figure F2
  Male Female
Number of offenders transfered to Canada during last 10 years 84% 16%

Source: International Transfers Database

The following table represents the number of offenders, by gender, and by age at the time of transfer. Data is gathered from the transfers occurred over the last 10 fiscal years, from 1999‑2000 to 2009‑2010.

Table F3: Transfers to Canada –age of offenders
Age of offender at time of transfer Males Females Total
0 to 19 1 2 3
20 to 29 156 48 204
30 to 39 227 38 265
40 to 49 181 31 212
50 to 59 88 9 97
60 to 69 38 3 41
70 to 79 8 0 8
79 and over 0 0 0
Total 698 131 830

Source: International Transfers Database

Figure F3: Transfers to Canada –age of offenders
Age of offender at time of transfer
0 to 19 20 to 29 30 to 39 40 to 49 50 to 59 60 to 69 70 to 79 79 and over
Males 1 156 227 181 88 38 8 0
Females 2 48 38 31 9 3 0 0
Total 3 204 265 212 97 41 8 0

Source: International Transfers Database

The following table represents the number of offenders and their length of sentence of imprisonment and probation orders that were transferred. These numbers reflect the length of the foreign imposed sentence – some have had their sentence adapted to Canadian laws.

Table F4: Transfers to Canada (last 10 years)
Transfers during Fiscal Year Length of foreign sentence imposed of offenders who have transferred Total
Less than 2 years 2 to 5 years 5 to 10 years 10 to 25 years 25 to Life
1999 – 2000 4 23 23 18 2 70
2000 – 2001 5 29 27 21 2 84
2001 – 2002 10 29 32 23 2 96
2002 – 2003 2 35 26 16 1 80
2003 – 2004 5 56 20 13 4 98
2004 – 2005 6 34 24 11 4 79
2005 - 2006 2 44 29 14 1 90
2006 - 2007 5 19 18 10 1 53
2007 - 2008 1 30 33 6 1 71
2008 - 2009 3 39 33 5 2 82
2009 - 2010 0 10 15 2 0 27
Total 43 348 280 139 20 830

Source: International Transfers Database

** Numbers may be different from number of provincial cases transferred – as some sentences may have originally been greater than 2 years, but due to legislation, sentence was subsequently reduced once transferred to Canada – therefore having the offender transferred to provincial jurisdiction.

Transfer Operations

The frequency of transfer operations are determined by the needs of the receiving and sending countries and of the offender. CSC's International Transfers Unit, in conjunction with the respective country, sets the transfer dates, plans, and implements the ensuing transfer operations. Transfer operations can occur in groups or individually. Over the past 10 years (from 1999‑2000 to 2009-2010), 253 transfer operations were effected for 844 offenders.

The following chart illustrates the number of operations by fiscal year and the number of offenders transferring to and from Canada. These numbers include both Federal and Provincial offenders.

Table F5: Number of Transfer Operations to and from Canada
Transfer date in fiscal year Number of Transfer Operations Number of Offenders
1999 - 2000 19 71
2000 - 2001 27 84
2001 - 2002 31 98
2002 - 2003 20 81
2003 - 2004 20 99
2004 - 2005 25 80
2005 - 2006 21 91
2006 - 2007 25 57
2007 - 2008 21 72
2008 - 2009 34 83
2009 - 2010 10 28
Total 253 844

Source: International Transfers Database

When applying for a transfer to Canada, offenders are asked to indicate their region of choice. In the last ten fiscal years, 785 were transferred to the Federal system in Canada. The remainder were provincial offenders. Of those 785, 41% were transferred to the Ontario Region, followed by the Pacific Region at 29%; 24% to the Quebec region; 4% to the Prairies and 2% to the Atlantic Region. The following table demonstrates the breakdown of offenders' region of choice.

Table F6: Transfers to Canada by Region of Choice
Fiscal Year Pacific Prairies Ontario Quebec Atlantic Total
1999 - 2000 10 3 31 20 0 64
2000 - 2001 13 4 41 18 3 79
2001 - 2002 14 4 46 22 0 86
2002 - 2003 24 3 24 26 1 78
2003 - 2004 36 4 35 17 1 93
2004 - 2005 25 3 26 18 1 73
2005 - 2006 36 4 25 20 3 88
2006 - 2007 16 2 21 8 1 48
2007 - 2008 23 3 22 22 0 70
2008 - 2009 21 1 41 15 1 79
2009 - 2010 10 0 11 5 1 27
Total 228 31 323 191 12 785

Source: International Transfers Database

Conclusion

In the 32 years since the first international transfer took place with the United States, there has been a steady increase in the number of agreements in place with foreign countries, thereby increasing the number of applications received for processing and of the number of offenders transferred to and from Canada.

An analysis of the information contained in this report demonstrates that the purpose and the principles of the International Transfer of Offenders Act have been fulfilled, and that the International Transfer of Offenders program is consistent with the mandate of the Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) and it's Mission Statement in that the program contributes to public safety by actively encouraging and assisting offenders to become law‑abiding citizens, while exercising reasonable, safe, secure and humane control. It ensures that offenders are gradually returned to society and that they have the opportunity to participate in programming that targets the factors that may have led to their offence.

CSC is part of a large public safety continuum that aims at keeping Canadians safe through delivering programs and services in areas such as law enforcement, border security, emergency management, national security, crime prevention and conditional release.

Furthermore, CSC has set specific priorities for 2009-2010 and beyond, which includes the safe transition of offenders into the community. The International Transfer of Offenders program is a meaningful example of CSC's progress in meeting its objectives.