Correctional Service Canada
www.csc-scc.gc.ca
Common menu bar links
Annual Report on the International Transfer of Offenders 2007-2008
This Web page has been archived on the Web.
Institutional Reintegration Operations 
Offender Programs and Reintegration Branch
2007-2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
- The International Transfers Program
- Purpose of the International Transfers Program
- International Transfers
- Introduction
- 1. Transfers to Canada from Foreign Countries
- 2. Transfers from Canada to Foreign Countries 1978-2008
- 3. Time between Receipt of Sentencing Documentation and the Minister's Decision
- 4. Timeframe from decisions to Transfers
- 5. Applications Processed by the International Transfers Unit
- 6. Caseload Flow-Through
- CONCLUSION
- ANNEX "A" - Transfers to Canada by Fiscal Year
- ANNEX "B" - Transfers from Canada by Fiscal Year
The International Transfers Program
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/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 agreement in place.
The following report on the International Transfer of Offenders provides an overview of the program's activities in the last ten years. The information is pulled from the International Transfers ' database. The data is reported by fiscal year (from April 1 to March 31 of the following year).
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. If offenders are not transferred, they may ultimately be deported to their country of citizenship at the end of their sentence, without correctional supervision/jurisdiction and without the benefit of programming.
International Transfers
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.
The progress made since the launch of the transfer of offenders program in Canada is considerable. Between 1978 and 2008, 1547 offenders were transferred pursuant to an agreement on the International Transfer of Offenders. Of these, 1422 Canadians were transferred to Canada , whereas the remaining 125 consisted of foreign nationals who were repatriated to their country of citizenship.
Introduction
At any given time, there are over 2000 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 help alleviate these undue hardships, Canada has entered into international transfer agreements with over 70 countries. These agreements, along with Canada 's implementing legislation (ITOA), are the legal basis for effecting international transfers. Without the benefit of transfers, offenders are deported 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 offenders and their reintegration into society as law abiding citizens.
1. Transfers to Canada from Foreign Countries
The majority of the 1422 Canadian citizens transferred to Canada were effected from the United States , specifically 79% (1127). Consequently, Canada and the United States have agreed to four (4) set transfers per year. The second country from where the most Canadians were repatriated is Mexico with 4.2% (60 offenders). Next, we have the United Kingdom at 2.4% (34 offenders), Peru 2.2% (31 offenders), and Trinidad and Tobago at 1.5% (21 offenders). The following chart illustrates the number of international transfers to Canada effected since 1978. For detailed information regarding which countries were involved in the international transfers, please refer to Annex A.
TABLE 1.1: Transfers to Canada
Source: International Transfers Database, June 11, 2008
When applying for a transfer to Canada , offenders are asked to indicate their region of choice on their application. In the last ten fiscal years, 40% were transferred to the Ontario Region, followed by the Pacific Region at 27%; 26.5% to the Quebec region; 4.3% to the Prairies and 1.8% to the Atlantic Region.
In the last ten years (1997-98 to 2007-08), 839 offenders were transferred to Canada. The following table demonstrates the breakdown of offenders' region of choice.
TABLE 1.2: Transfers to Canada by Region
| Fiscal Year | PACIFIC | PRAIRIES | ONTARIO | QUEBEC | ATLANTIC | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1997 - 1998 | 10 | 0 | 13 | 29 | 2 | 54 |
| 1998 - 1999 | 8 | 3 | 36 | 15 | 2 | 64 |
| 1999 - 2000 | 11 | 5 | 33 | 20 | 1 | 70 |
| 2000 - 2001 | 13 | 4 | 44 | 20 | 3 | 84 |
| 2001 - 2002 | 21 | 4 | 49 | 22 | 0 | 96 |
| 2002 - 2003 | 25 | 3 | 25 | 26 | 1 | 80 |
| 2003 - 2004 | 37 | 5 | 38 | 17 | 1 | 98 |
| 2004 - 2005 | 26 | 3 | 29 | 20 | 1 | 79 |
| 2005 - 2006 | 37 | 4 | 25 | 21 | 3 | 90 |
| 2006 - 2007 | 19 | 2 | 21 | 10 | 1 | 53 |
| 2007 - 2008 | 23 | 3 | 23 | 22 | 0 | 71 |
| Total | 230 | 36 | 336 | 222 | 15 | 839 |
Source: International Transfers Database, June 11, 2008
2. Transfers from Canada to Foreign Countries 1978-2008
TABLE 2.1: Transfers from Canada to Foreign Countries
Of the 125 transfers from Canada to foreign countries, 86% (107) were American citizens. Transfers to other foreign countries are as follows: Netherlands 6.4% (8), the United Kingdom 2.4% (3) and to other countries 5.6% (7). Annex B details all transfers from Canada to foreign countries from 1978-79 to 2007-08.
Source: International Transfers Database, June 11, 2008
3. Time between Receipt of Sentencing Documentation and the Minister's Decision
The International Transfers Unit is committed to processing international transfer applications within six (6) to nine (9) months from the date of receipt of the sentencing documentation from the foreign country to obtaining the Minister's decision.
It currently takes an average of 6.37 months to obtain a Ministerial decision once the sentencing documentation has been received from the foreign country, a vast improvement over the processing time in 1997-1998 (15 months). The following chart shows the overall improvement in processing timeframes in the last 10 years.
TABLE 3.1: Processing Timeframes
Source: International Transfers Database, June 16, 2008
Of the 1108 cases for which the sentencing documentation was received between 1998 and 2008, 16.43% (182 cases) obtained the Minister's decision within the International Transfers Unit's processing guideline of six (6) to (9) months. Of the 1108 cases, 53.43% (592 cases) were processed before the minimum processing timeframe. In approximately 30.14% of the cases (334 cases), the International Transfers Unit was unable to respect the processing guidelines due to a number of issues such as workload, complexity of the sentence, incomplete sentencing documentation, etc.
4. Timeframe from decisions to Transfers
Once an offender's request to transfer is approved by the Minister, the International Transfers Unit initiates the coordination of the offender's repatriation, provided his request has also been approved by the foreign country. The following chart illustrates the average time required to effect a transfer from the time the Minister gives his approval. The data presented indicates this timeframe has remained fairly constant since the 1997-98 fiscal year. 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 organise the transfer. With the advent of new countries signing agreements, the complexity of the cases and the increasing number of applications being received, these timeframes will fluctuate greatly.
TABLE 4.1: Timeframe between Minister's Decision and the Transfer
Source: International Transfers Database, June 17, 2008
5. Applications Processed by the International Transfers Unit
At any given time, there are anywhere from 200 to 450 applications being processed by the International Transfers Unit. In the last five years, from 2003-04 to 2007-08 , 1243 applications for transfer were received for analysis and processing. Of those applications, to date, 25.66% (319) have resulted in a transfer, while 44.4% (552) were denied. It is important to note that these numbers will fluctuate since some applications are still "in process", i.e. an application received in any of the years for which a decision has not yet been rendered.
TABLE 5.1: Processing of Applications
| Fiscal Year | Applications Received | Number/Percentage to date that have resulted in Transfers | Number/Percentage to date that have been denied by either Country | Denied by Canada | Denied by foreign country | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| # | % | # | % | ||||
| 2003-04 | 287 | 107 | 37.28% | 125 | 43.55% | 5 | 120 |
| 2004-05 | 264 | 95 | 35.98% | 118 | 44.69% | 9 | 109 |
| 2005-06 | 261 | 71 | 27.20% | 129 | 49.42% | 24 | 105 |
| 2006-07 | 226 | 42 | 18.58% | 111 | 49.11% | 23 | 88 |
| 2007-08 | 205 | 4 | 1.95% | 59 | 28.78% | 6 | 63 |
| TOTAL | 1243 | 319 | 552 | 67 | 485 | ||
Source: International Transfers Database, June 11, 2008
Of the applications received between April 1, 2003 , and March 31, 2008 , 485 denials were handed down by foreign countries; the majority being denied by the United States. As demonstrated in table 5.2, a small percentage of cases were denied by Canada.
In determining whether to consent to the transfer of a Canadian offender, the Minister must take into consideration a number of factors listed in section 10 of the ITOA:
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.
Of the 67 cases that were denied by Canada , the reasons invoked by the Minister of Public Safety were based on his finding that:
- the offender's return to Canada would jeopardize the safety of Canadians and the security of Canada ; and/or
- that in his opinion, the offender had left or remained outside Canada with the intention of abandoning Canada as his place of permanent residence.
The majority of these denials were based either on section 10.1(a) of the ITOA, that the return of offenders convicted of sexual offences, burglary with assault and murder and drug related offences would constitute a threat to the security of Canada and/or section 10.1(b) where in the Minister's opinion the offenders had abandoned Canada as their place of permanent residence as they had been living in the other country for a number of years.
Denials by the foreign countries were also based on a series of factors such as dual citizenship, law enforcement concerns, lack of a removal order (for deportation), discrepancies in the administration of the sentence and unpaid restitution.
TABLE 5.2: Denial of Applications received between April 1, 2003 and March 31, 2008
Source: International Transfers Database, June 11, 2008
6. Caseload Flow-Through
The following chart 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 6.1: Flow-Through of Applications
| Fiscal Year | Carried over from previous year | New applications received | Caseload for given fiscal year |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2003-04 | 302 |
287 |
589 |
| 2004-05 | 346 | 264 | 610 |
| 2005-06 | 350 | 261 | 611 |
| 2006-07 | 242 | 226 | 468 |
| 2007-08 | 298 | 205 | 503 |
Source: International Transfers Database, June 20, 2008
CONCLUSION
In the 30 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 doesn't only demonstrate that the purpose and the principles of the International Transfer of Offenders Act have been fulfilled; it supports 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.
Furthermore, CSC has set specific priorities for 2007-08 and beyond, which includes the safe transition of offenders into the community. The International Transfer of Offenders program is a meaningful example of how CSC can meet its objectives.
