Blog Post.
A CBSA removal order interview is a mandatory appointment where an officer confirms your identity, checks whether you hold a valid travel document, and begins arranging your removal from Canada. Preparing for one comes down to five steps:
Kingwell Immigration Law is a Toronto-based firm built around this kind of work. We act for people across Toronto and the rest of Canada at every stage of the removal process, from the first call-in letter through to stay motions at the Federal Court.
Preparation means finding out what CBSA already knows, assembling the documents that answer it, and settling in advance how you will respond to the questions. Almost all of that work belongs in the weeks before the appointment rather than on the morning of it.
Part of what we do is decide with you what has to be disclosed and how best to present it.
Daniel Kingwell puts the principle plainly: “Live in the real world. If you’ve got a problem, present it. Be upfront and deal with it.”
We take over the file before the interview date, establish what CBSA is actually working from, and deal with the officer directly on your behalf. That usually means a records request, a written package delivered in advance, and a clear plan for what happens if the officer moves to set a removal date.
CBSA calls people in for one of two broad reasons:
The letter itself is the clue, and the difference shapes everything that follows.
Where no order exists yet, the officer may be preparing a report under section 44 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Common triggers include:
Where an order already exists, the purpose shifts to logistics. We read the letter alongside your file and tell you which of these two situations you are in, because the strategy is completely different in each.
Removal interviews follow a fairly consistent sequence. Under section 48 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, an enforceable removal order must be enforced as soon as possible, and every step in the appointment serves that end.
We can be involved at each of these stages, and the earlier we come in, the more room there is to influence where the sequence ends.
Bring everything the call-in letter lists, plus anything that shows a live legal proceeding. Officers decide on the day based on what is physically in front of them, so a document sitting at home is a document that does not count.
We assemble and index this material with you, and where something is missing we deal with the officer about it rather than leaving you to explain a gap on the spot.
You are expected to pay for your own removal. Where you are unwilling or unable to, CBSA covers the cost and recovers it later, and that recovery lands at the moment you apply to come back.
Before you commit to a ticket, we will tell you whether there is still a realistic prospect of stopping or delaying the removal, so the decision is made with the full picture rather than under pressure in the room.
There is no automatic right to have a lawyer in the room, but the picture is more nuanced than a simple yes or no. Whether you have a right to counsel turns almost entirely on one question: are you detained?
If you are not detained, the Supreme Court’s decision in Dehghani v Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1993] 1 SCR 1053, established that the right to counsel does not extend to routine information gathering examinations. The enforcement manuals officers work from reflect this, stating that a non-detained person does not have the right to have counsel present at a section 44 interview. Those manuals also direct officers to raise the possibility of obtaining counsel before the interview begins.
Where you are arrested or detained, section 10(b) of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is engaged, and you must be told of your right to counsel without delay. In practice, officers frequently allow a representative to attend where counsel is already on record, so we seek that permission in advance and put our position on the file in writing either way.
Skipping the appointment makes your position significantly worse. CBSA has stated that where a person fails to appear for either a removal interview or a scheduled removal date, it can issue a Canada-wide warrant for their arrest.
Once that warrant exists, you can be arrested during an unrelated police stop, at a border crossing, or at your home address. You may then be held in a holding facility until removal is carried out, which closes off almost every option that was available while you were still at liberty.
Where illness, a work conflict, or a genuine scheduling problem stands in the way, we make that request in writing and in advance on your behalf, with the supporting evidence attached.
Detention is a live possibility at these interviews, not a remote one. Under section 55 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, an officer can arrest and detain a foreign national where there are reasonable grounds to believe they are inadmissible and either unlikely to appear for removal or a danger to the public, or where identity has not been established.
In practice, the flight risk assessment does most of the work. Missed appointments, a history of non-compliance, no fixed address, and the absence of any departure plan all push in the same direction, and people detained in the Toronto area are typically held at the Toronto Immigration Holding Centre on Rexdale Boulevard in Etobicoke, a short drive from Toronto Pearson International Airport.
Much of this risk can be reduced before the appointment, which is why we put an address, a plan, and a lawyer on the record ahead of the date. Where detention does happen, we appear at the review and argue for release on conditions.
Sometimes the block on removal has nothing to do with your own circumstances and everything to do with the country you would be sent to. Two mechanisms do this work, and both are checked as impediments at the interview stage.
Both lists change as conditions change, and people facing serious inadmissibility on national security or criminality grounds do not benefit from either measure. We check your destination against the current list of affected countries and raise it with the officer where it applies.
Being called in does not mean everything is finished. Several avenues remain available, though most run on short deadlines that start at the interview itself.
Deferral requests are refused far more often than people expect. Daniel Kingwell looks for two factors before recommending one: children who are settled in Canada and enrolled in school, and physical risk in the home country that has never been properly assessed.
Separation from a spouse or family, on its own, is not enough, because the courts have repeatedly described that as the normal result of removal. Having a Canadian-born child does not prevent removal either, and we will tell you honestly whether a deferral request has a realistic prospect before you spend money pursuing one.
💡 Additional reading: how to stop a removal order
The three types of removal orders are not equivalent, and the one you are subject to determines whether you can ever come back without permission. This is one of the most consequential details on the paperwork, and it is routinely misread.
Order type | The clock that runs | Returning to Canada |
Departure order | 30 days from the order becoming enforceable to leave and confirm your departure with CBSA. Detention or a stay pauses that 30-day period. | No Authorization to Return to Canada needed if you complied. Miss the window, and it automatically becomes a deportation order. |
Exclusion order | The bar runs from the date the order is enforced. | An ARC is required for one year, or five years where the finding was misrepresentation. |
Deportation order | No end date applies. | An ARC is required at any time after the order was enforced. |
The departure order is the one that catches people out, because leaving quietly without confirming departure converts it into a deportation order. We confirm which order you are actually under and what CBSA has recorded, so there are no surprises years later when you apply to return.
We have taken removal stage refusals to the Federal Court and had them overturned. Two examples from our case results:
Federal Court orders IRCC to reconsider PRRA application of Iranian man. Pre-Removal Risk Assessment applicant from Iran. He maintained that he was at risk in Iran for attending political demonstrations.
IRCC refused his application, finding that he had not provided sufficient evidence of risk. We appealed to the Federal Court and the decision was overturned, the Court agreeing that the officer had improperly rejected new evidence of ongoing danger. The Court ordered IRCC to reconsider the PRRA application.
A.M. v Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (2019 FC 270)
PRRA applicant wins appeal to Federal Court after IRCC rejected her application. Pre-Removal Risk Assessment applicant. She claimed to be threatened in Nigeria due to her LGBT identity.
IRCC rejected her application, rejecting her evidence. We appealed the decision to the Federal Court, and the Court overturned the decision, finding that the officer had failed to consider important evidence of threats to her from her husband, and had also failed to hold a PRRA interview. Her application was returned for review.
O.J. v Minister of Citizenship and Immigration (2019 FC 684)
An interview date feels like a countdown, and that is exactly how it is designed to feel. What it actually marks is a point where the right legal work can still change the outcome, and where the wrong response, or no response at all, closes doors that were open the week before.
Our team handles enforcement and removal work every day, and we know what a removals officer is looking for and what will genuinely move them. We will read the file, tell you honestly what the realistic options are, and take the interview on for you rather than leaving you to face it alone.
Yes, in some cases: Kingwell Immigration Law submits written requests to CBSA asking for a change of venue, usually where the interview is scheduled far from where a client lives. CBSA is not obliged to agree, so the request needs supporting evidence and should be filed early.
Kingwell Immigration Law recommends arranging an interpreter in advance, which CBSA usually permits, while a family member attending is left to the officer’s discretion. Answers at a removal interview go into the officer’s notes, so inaccurate interpretation is very hard to correct once the file moves forward.
Yes, and Kingwell Immigration Law flags this early for refugee claimants. CBSA states that obtaining a travel document for someone without a valid passport often involves engaging with their country of nationality, which can mean contact between Canadian authorities and the government a client fled from.
Only with a valid permit, and Kingwell Immigration Law finds most people under an enforceable removal order have already lost status. That removes any authorization to work or study, and continuing without a permit adds a fresh non-compliance issue under section 41 of the IRPA.
CBSA does not manage personal affairs, so Kingwell Immigration Law advises clients to arrange banking access, storage or shipping, and notice on a lease well before the removal date. Unfinished personal arrangements will not on their own justify deferring a removal, and they are far harder to resolve from abroad.
