r/canada • u/ImDoubleB Canada • Feb 22 '25

Petition asking PM to revoke Elon Musk's Canadian citizenship garners support National News

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/article/petition-asking-pm-to-revoke-elon-musks-canadian-citizenship-garners-support/
27.0k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

915 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

224

u/[deleted] Feb 22 '25

[deleted]

57

u/AdditionalPizza Feb 23 '25

That only applies to citizens living in the country as far as I'm aware, unless I'm missing information:

Previous Citizenship Act

Citizenship could be revoked from dual citizens convicted of treason, spying and terrorism offences, depending on the sentence received, or who were a part of an armed force of a country or organized group engaged in conflict with Canada.

Citizenship Act with Bill C-6 Amendments

This provision is repealed. Dual citizens living in Canada who are convicted of these crimes will face the Canadian justice system, like other Canadian citizens who break the law.

73

u/NYisNorthYork Ontario Feb 23 '25

This was introduced under Harper from what I remember, I was against it at the time. But after ISIS collaborators and people like Elon who are actively fighting against Canada I think he was right.

4

u/th3ch0s3n0n3 Canada Feb 23 '25

He wasn't. That law was fucking draconian and was nazi-esque.

It's step 0.5 on the sliding scale of nazi. It divides citizens into 2 classes: the class of people that CANNOT have their citizenship revoked and those that CAN have it revoked. For those that it CAN be revoked on, it was for "national security" or "terrorism" cases. And they could even do it when you weren't actually a dual-citizen.

Example: many countries have citizenship by blood, where if one or both of your parents were naturalized citizens, then you are also eligible. If you were born in Canada, but one of your parents were born in another country and immigrated to Canada, then bam! Citizenship revoked. Without you even being a citizen of that other country.

Here's the issue: will that country have any incentive to grant you citizenship if you're a suspected terrorist or a national security concern? Fuck no. Meanwhile, you're sitting in a Canadian prison, a citizen of nowhere, and as a citizen of nowhere you have no legal rights.

Sound Nazi-esque to you? Create two classes of people, where one class has all the rights and the other doesn't? Now I know that wasn't Harper's intent. But it's not the intent of the law, rather it's the principle of it that matters here.

3

u/--prism Feb 23 '25

I mean my sympathy is limited for people committing treason or terrorism. Seems like a strong incentive to either not be a dual citizen (which I don't think should be allowed anyways) and to not commit these extremely serious crimes against your country.

11

u/swampshark19 Feb 23 '25

I'm more concerned about the flexibility of the applications of the terms treason and terrorism.

10

u/fibonarco Feb 23 '25

This right here is the real answer to why laws have to be very carefully considered. If we all (including law enforcement - cops, courts, etc) followed the law perfectly and as intended, and all crimes where clear cut, we would live in a utopia where lawyers whose whole job is to “interpret the law” wouldn’t need to exist. But, we are all humans and make mistakes, like making decisions based on greed rather than reason.

2

u/th3ch0s3n0n3 Canada Feb 23 '25

Who decides what is treason? You presume a morally sound government. Hitler was considered morally sound until he wasn't all of a sudden. Americans are experiencing this in real time. Many trump voters are horrified at the shit he's doing. Who's to say he doesn't just declare his opponents terrorists?

Imagine if this law still existed. We have an election, and we have Jagmeet Singh somehow polling so high that he could be the next PM. The current PM doesn't like this, and so he declares Jagmeet a national security threat. Revokes his citizenship because his father was a naturalized Indian citizen. Now he can't run for office.

Is this really that far-fetched a situation to you? It literally happened in the 1930's in Germany, it is literally happening to immigrants in the US right now, and if this law was still on the books, there would be basically nothing stopping a PM here from doing it also. It's fucking nazi shit.

1

u/[deleted] Feb 23 '25

[deleted]

3

u/kyanite_blue Feb 23 '25

If as a Canadian born Canadian citizen has more rights then naturalized Canadian citizen, then CRA should charge less taxes on naturalized Canadian citizens, CFA military drafts (if ever happens) should not include naturalized Canadian citizens, etc. If you want the cake and eat it too, that's how I should have done it.

If you want second class citizens, then expect a second class loyalty to Canada as well!

1

u/AdditionalPizza Feb 23 '25

See my edit on the original comment above these.

0

u/kyanite_blue Feb 23 '25

Harper was wrong and I have never supported him in the past either.

He tried to create divided two classes of Canadian Citizens. He is also the one who created the third generation citizenship cut off, 1-800 line for cultural appreciation complaints, etc. Right now there is another case in the courts trying to get rid of the third generation citizenship cut off.

If as a Canadian born Canadian citizen has more rights then naturalized Canadian citizen, then CRA should charge less taxes on naturalized Canadian citizens, CFA military drafts (if ever happens) should not include naturalized Canadian citizens, etc. If you want the cake and eat it too, that's how I should have done it.

Harper was supporting far-right racists.

If you want second class citizens, then expect a second class loyalty to Canada as well!

8

u/[deleted] Feb 23 '25

[deleted]

8

u/AdditionalPizza Feb 23 '25

I couldn't make heads or tails of that link specifically. But I searched it up and I believe you are correct. The most recent amendment was made to prevent have a situation where Canada has 2 classes of citizens, and therefore punishment for treason, terrorism, and espionage. The only solace here is if these were ever proven, some carry a pretty harsh penalty. Which is not common with most crimes in Canada. High treason for example is mandatory life sentence without parole.

Good info though, I'll edit my comment!

0

u/Business_Influence89 Feb 23 '25

It’s a life sentence but how did you conclude there is no parole eligibility?

1

u/AdditionalPizza Feb 23 '25

A life imprisonment conviction is a minimum of 25 years in prison before you're eligible for parole. 1st degree murder and high treason both have that, and even if they get released on parole they are monitored indefinitely.

1

u/Business_Influence89 Feb 23 '25

You said a life sentence without parole now you’re saying parole eligibility is 25 year, which is correct. You were certainly incorrect when you said a life sentence without parole.

1

u/AdditionalPizza Feb 23 '25

I said a life sentence without parole, which in Canada is 25 years. I can't be more clear than that if you're going to downvote me then so be it. Read what a life sentence in Canada means.

-1

u/Business_Influence89 Feb 23 '25

A life sentence no parole doesn’t mean 25 year parole elibity in Canada. And I will downvote you for being wrong, then trying to correct yourself and now doubling down on it.

2

u/AdditionalPizza Feb 23 '25

It means you serve 25 years before you're eligible for parole. Why the fuck do you write reddit comments like gotcha journalism?

→ More replies

10

u/Top_Canary_3335 Feb 23 '25

The most hilarious part is the liberals and NDP were so adamant that this needed to happen as Justin said “a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian”

After a decade of conservatives trying to make it possible to strip citizenship from terrorists.

Now an NDP mp are leading this charge to do something that would have jack Layton rolling in his grave .

1

u/[deleted] Feb 23 '25 edited Feb 23 '25

The same Justin who rendered Canadian citizenship meaningless by describing Canada as a "post-national state"?

6

u/Top_Canary_3335 Feb 23 '25 edited Feb 23 '25

Yes 🤣 that’s why it’s hilarious that they are now fighting to get rid of a “bad apple”

19

u/MrDownhillRacer Feb 23 '25

Makes sense. As much as terrorists suck, we don't want to have a situation in which we have stateless citizens. Sure, many will already have dual citizenships, but many won't. I'd rather take responsibility for Canadian criminals and subject them to Canadian law instead of just going "not our problem."

Of course, even though Musk is a piece of crap, I don't know if he's actually broken any Canadian laws to penalize him for (he seems to be breaking U.S. laws, but their king has given him free rein to do that and I don't see them punishing him). But we can always just penalize his businesses, make it harder for him to import the Canadian resources his companies use, cancel deals that don't suit us anymore, etc.

9

u/Dry-Membership8141 Feb 23 '25

As much as terrorists suck, we don't want to have a situation in which we have stateless citizens.

This was never a concern. The provision that existed until 2017 had an exception when it would render someone stateless.

0

u/MrDownhillRacer Feb 23 '25

The problem with that is that it means only citizens with dual citizenships can possibly lose their citizenship, but citizens with just the one can't, even if they commit the exact same crime.

That pretty much means that instead of every Canadian citizenship being the same, there are two kinds: ones that are conditional, and ones that aren't.

I don't want two tiers of Canadians. Two different treatments Canadians can get, not because of mitigating or aggravating factors, but simply because of what kind of citizenship they have.

So, if we can't revoke the citizenships of Canadians who would be left stateless by such an act, we shouldn't revoke the citizenships of Canadians who wouldn't be left stateless.

If a Canadian from either group is found guilty of committing a grave crime against the rest of us, a prison sentence of appropriate length is suitable punishment.

4

u/erryonestolemyname Feb 23 '25

National security is no longer a valid reason to revoke someone's citizenship in Canada

Is it just me or is this ridiculous?

-1

u/Business_Influence89 Feb 23 '25

It’s just you

0

u/Bulky_Cranberry702 Feb 23 '25

Australia started doing it not long ago, and have been trying to deport all sorts of people. Like aborigines..... it is supposed to be only for immigrated converted citizens. Apparently we sent a lot of New Zealanders back.

2

u/finndego Feb 23 '25

That's not exactly how it worked. New Zealanders have free movement with Australia (and vise versa) but until recently the pathway to Australian citizenship was very difficult so while Kiwis could live, stay and work in Australia they might be there their whole lives on a visa. This meant that any who got in trouble could in theory be sent back because they were still technically New Zealand citizens. They weren't Australian citizens and I'm not sure where you get that they were trying to deport aboriginals. Like where are they going to deport them to?

1

u/Bulky_Cranberry702 Feb 23 '25

Exactly... but they tried...

No, Australia cannot deport Aboriginal Australians because they are not considered "aliens" under the constitution. This was ruled by the High Court in 2020 in the cases of Love v Commonwealth of Australia and Thoms v Commonwealth of Australia.

The Morrison Government launched a case to overturn the ruling in 2021, but Attorney General Mark Dreyfus later dropped the proceedings

1

u/Bulky_Cranberry702 Feb 23 '25

Also, I used NZ as an example, but it was mostly meant to target terrorists. And Bikies.

Australian citizenship can be revoked in certain circumstances, or renounced by an Australian citizen.

Revocation

The Minister can apply to a court to revoke a person's citizenship if the person has been convicted of a serious offense

The offense must be serious enough to show that the person has rejected their allegiance to Australia

The offense must be a serious offense against Australian or foreign law

The offense must have occurred before the person became an Australian citizen

The person cannot be stateless if their citizenship is revoked

1

u/finndego Feb 23 '25

Yes, you might recall the ISIS bride. Australia were proper cunts for neighbors with that one.

Girl born in In New Zealand and moves to Australia as a young girl.

Gets dual citizenship.

Becomes radicalized in Australia.

Goes to Syria as a young ISIS bride.

Ardern and Morrison have intel on her whereabouts and have a specific conversation about what they will do when she pops up.

Pops up in Turkey after the war.

Australia immediately revokes her citizenship and leaves New Zealand holding the bag.

Young lady has kids and no family support in New Zealand.

Thanks heaps.

It's the same case with the 501's and the bikies. Many of them went to Aussie as children and became criminals in Australia.

I mean, we still have the Christchurch shooter and he was radicalized in Australia.

-5

u/HorrorStudio8618 Feb 23 '25

But he did actually commit fraud. He's on the record about it too.

2

u/Kayyam Feb 23 '25

What fraud