Analyzing Ethics and Professional Conduct: IMM105 Assignment Solution

This assignment addresses key aspects of ethics and professional conduct within the Canadian immigration system. Part 1 contrasts professional misconduct with conduct unbecoming for regulated immigration consultants, highlighting their responsibilities to uphold professional standards and avoid conflicts of interest. Part 2 analyzes the "Miller Decision," examining how Ken Miller contravened policies regarding unauthorized representatives, specifically Section 91 of the IRPA, and the implications of his actions. The assignment also explores the role of the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) in handling complaints. Part 3 discusses the issue of "crooked" immigration consultants, the exploitation of vulnerable immigrants, and the role of the IRB in cracking down on illegal practices. The assignment also highlights the importance of understanding the complexities of immigration and the need for regulated consultants.

Part 1
The immigration Consultants of Canada Regulatory council is a government organization
that safeguards and promotes the interest of the Canadian people by overseeing authorized
immigration professions to make sure that they are compliant to the professional code of conduct
. In order to have a license for a regulated immigration consultant , it is necessary for a candidate
to be registered under the ICCRC. These consultants have the obligation to carry out
consultations with their prospective clients across the globe and further advise them on the
eligible immigration terms to Canada or between Canada and the United States . When a
regulated immigration consultant is considered to have immigration misconduct , he or she may
have violated the code of professionalism and ethics .Therefore , all the regulated immigration
consultants ought to uphold their professional’s responsibilities by offering professional
standards of service .
Professional misconduct implies that the consultant is guilty of inappropriate delivery of
services to their customers . It can also be attributed to conflict of interest or disrespecting the
confidentiality of the clients .Nevertheless, the difference between conduct becoming and
professional misconduct of regulated immigration consultants is that the idea of unbecoming is
often contrary to the public interest while professional misconduct is the unacceptable conduct
that involved frequent failure to keep rational diligence or standards
Both are instances of unprofessional conduct that might bring the reputation of the
consultant into undermining public confidence in the integrity of all immigration
consultants .Professional misconduct is the failure to comply with the professional code of ethics
, the IRPA and its regulations as well as the ICCRC bylaws (ICCRU ,2019). Professional
misconduct is associated with an improper action of a regulated immigration consultant during

the process of carrying out business . Conduct unbecoming is described as the inappropriate
conduct that occurs outside the confines of regulated practices of an immigration consultant and
mainly does not affect the client
Part 2
Question 1
Section 5.3 policy for handling immigration and Refugee Board of Canada complaints
concerning unauthorized , paid representatives . According to this section, rather than just
focusing on the ethical standards of informed consent , IRBs and investigators ought to follow
the lead of the federal regulations and further emphasize on disclosure as indicated in the consent
form. Nevertheless , from an ethics point of view , the process of handling immigration and
informed consent , is the fundamental link between the prospective participants and the
investigators in the entire process (Duhaime 2019). Therefore , it is important to ensure that
informed consent is adhered to through which all the involved parties share the required details
and during which the participants at any time can freely choose whether they should be
represented . It is important to put more emphasis on the issue of informed consent and ensure
that representation is based on ethics and competency . This implies that clients ought to
understand that they have to make proper research in order to make informed decisions and that
their choices are made voluntarily .
Question 2
Section 5.6 policy , used for handling immigration and Refugee board of Canada
complaints concerning Unauthorized , paid representatives . This policy was introduced as a
result of the implementation of the refugee reforms provisions of safeguarding Canada’s

immigration System Act. This policy acts as a standardization for the selection of decision
makers when the Refugee Appeal division references back to the Refugee protection Division for
further determination. In addition , it is also used as a standardized process for determining the
content of RAD-ordered redetermination case file .
Question 3
Section 91 of the IRPA was amended in 30th June 2011 ,and now it offers in Part :91.(1)
subject to this section , no individual shall knowingly , directly or indirectly represent or guide a
person for consideration or offer to do so in relation to the proceeding or application under the
Act . For a huge number of people , Immigration to Canada is not that easy . the procedure of
completing the application for immigration might present challenges for newcomers to Canada .
As mentioned earlier , the regulations were amended in 2011 in order to stipulate that no
individuals was not authorized representative could represent , guide or consult with a person
who was not an authorized or subject to the proceedings according to IRPA. In these
amendments to the regulations , the definition “authorized representative” was described as a
member in good terms with the board of a province . As a result , under the guidelines set out in
the IRPA and the regulations , it is only member in good standings of a provincial board . An
officer who is responsible for enforcing the Act or the IRB is also necessary. The provision is not
found directly in the IRPA, by through reference to the regulations .
In order to safeguard prospective applicants and also ensure that the integrity of Canada
is not tarnished, the government has established a set of regulatory frameworks that govern
immigration and citizenship[ consultant described under section 91 of the report. The issues
addressed within the act involve the lack of safeguards of the public regulatory framework .

Question 4
The management established that the policy for handling Immigration and Refugee board
of Canada complaints concerning unlawful , paid representatives offers that section 5.5 frequent
appearance at the board as unpaid representatives might be an indication that a representative
who claims to be unpaid might actually be charging a certain fee. According to the policy , the
frequent appearance are of significant concern when integrated to other factors such as relevant
information received from a current or a former client of that counsel . The board agrees as
established the allegation that Mr. Miller received some payments for his services in guiding and
representing the plaintiff in the RPD file TA9-07558 in her proceedings before the board ,
particularly by preparing her PIF.
Mr. Miller did not provide any evidence to dispute the plaintiff. A confirmed statement
that she had made payment to Milner for more than $2,000 for the service he provided . The
board indicated that , by accepting financial payments for representing the claimant, she agreed
to a Fee to the immigration and refugee protection Regulation in force at the time . This would
also lead to representation and advising a person for consideration in relation to the proceedings
contrary to subsection 91(1) of the IRPA.
Moreover , Mr. Miller’s former client , his regular appearance at the board since 2004
allegedly as an unpaid counsel raise huge concerns regarding the nature of Mr. Miller’s practices
and whether in constitutes a business , rather that offering a pro bono service for refugee
claimants. In addition , Mr. Miller was requested to offer necessary information regarding the
nature and structure of his business , how it is financed , the services it offers especially for
individuals who have proceedings before the board . In addition , it also included what fees are
charged for the services and the supporting financial and other information . Mr. Miller did not

offer any response to such allegations or any documentation associated to his practice . Since Mr.
Miller does not have strong evidence to satisfy the board that he is offering a pro bono service
for refugee plaintiff he represents before the Board , the board requested that Mr. Miller be
restricted from representing any individual and any division of the board .This restriction was
effective immediately and still remains in effect indefinitely , until the point that Mr. Miller
offers sufficient evidence that satisfies the is not accepting any consideration for his services in
relation to proceeding before the Board .The board also indicated that the decision should not
influence his capacity to earn a livelihood or impose economic hardship on him and in case Mr.
Miller become a member in good standing of a bar province , the ICCRC , this decision will no
longer be effective . This is due to the fact that Mr. Miller Contravened Article 2 (2.2.9) of the
RCIC code of professional Ethics
Part III
If there is one problem that people of Canada can agree with is the issues of crooked or
ghost immigrant consultants . Such individuals have become a huge problem for Canada
immigration system. There multiple stories abound the media of unsuspecting immigrants paying
a lot of money to illegal consultants , only to get to Canada and find that the employment
opportunities or the college program that they were promised is non-existent . As a result, most
immigrants have been forced to lie or forge documents in order to get to Canada , or the
consultant might carry out such activities for them without their knowledge . Such Susceptible
newcomers will usually turn to the immigrant lawyers in an effort to fix the harm done by the
ghost consultants .However , in most cases , they don’t succeed . even some of the most qualified
lawyers in the field are not able to reverse such destruction and save the individuals immigration
status . It is likely impossible to count how many vulnerable people have been exploited by such

fraudulent activities .According to Article 10 ; member as advocates 10.1.1 , when acting as an
advocate for the immigrants , the member ought to provide a firm position regarding the client’s
case within the confines of the law , while treating the IRB members and other relevant parties
with respect and authenticity. IRB is a federally regulated organization that helps in the
crackdown of illegal consultants . It establishes the necessary rules that consultants have to
adhere to and has the authority to establish the necessary disciplinary measures.
A good IRB case is that of Alfredo Arrojado, a popular member of the Philippine
community in Winnipeg . He was a former member of the Manitoba Human right commission .
recently he was charged with an offence of working as an unauthorized immigration consultant.
As a result, he received over $90,000 in fees over a period of 10 years . In another well-known
case is that of a BC man by the name Xu who was convicted in 2015. He was accused of taking a
total of $ 10 million in fees to file forged immigration documents . In this cases 800 of his former
client were taken under review by the government authorities (Duhaime2019) .Up to date most
of these clients still face possible deportation to China without refund .It is important to note that
in some countries , asylum has been considered as one key element is the wider discussion about
immigration as well as national identity. Therefore , it is important to first understand the unease
about immigrants and refugees and how they maneuver within the federal government system .
The biggest question is , is there a place in the Canadian immigration for a regulating or
training consultants? For many it might come down to the question of how much money has
been wasted . Even if the media raises awareness regarding this issue , the fact still remains that a
huge number of immigrants still turn to these rogue consultants instead of lawyers , based on the
belief that a consultant tend to charge a much lower fee than a consultant .

As indicated earlier , Canada , the biggest issues in dealing with rogue consultants is the
large number of illegal immigrants together with other clandestine who are already within the
Canadian territory . Therefore, it is important to ensure that the solutions helps in tackling large
scale trafficking of migrants , especially from the border between Canada and the United States .
However , for a number of reasons, Canada has tended to receive a huge number of asylum
application . A huge number of refugees , especially from the Middle East are provides with
temporary work permits on humanitarian basis . This , in the short-term relieves them the need of
applying for asylum .

Bibliography
Duhaime (2019). Conduct unbecoming. Retrieved from:
http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/C/ConductUnbecoming.aspx Accessed on 8th
August 8, 2019.
ICCRU (2019). National Regulatory Body. Retrieved from: https://iccrc-crcic.ca/ Accessed on
8th August 8, 2019.
Kwan, M. (2019). The standard of review on appeal for professional lawyer misconduct: the
Canadian perspective. Oxford University Commonwealth Law Journal, 19(1), 139-156.