\n
![\"ircc\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/ircc-3.jpg\")
<\/p>\nImmigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) has adopted technology to speed up application processing, but experts warn it may be creating more problems than it solves.<\/p>\n
Mario Bellissimo, an immigration lawyer and founder of Bellissimo Law Group PC, described the IRCC\u2019s use of AI as an \u201cinevitable\u201d and \u201ccommendable development.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThe principal advantage lies in efficiency. Processing times have been reduced, routine cases are triaged more effectively, and officers are able to concentrate their efforts on more complex matters,\u201d he said. \u201cFor example, automation in spousal sponsorships and temporary resident visa applications has significantly decreased assessment times.\u201d<\/p>\n
But although automation has helped reduce processing times, these gains raise issues about fairness and potential bias in decision-making.<\/p>\n
Efficiency vs. fairness
\n<\/p>\n
Mario Bellissimo (bellissimolawgroup.com) | Petra Molnar (Submitted)<\/p>\n
However, Bellissimo points to some serious issues, such as an over-reliance on technology.<\/p>\n
\u201cOne notable example involved refusal reasons being generated at the exact same timestamp as the application was processed, raising legitimate concerns about whether any substantive human review had occurred,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n
In an email to Daily Hive, an IRCC spokesperson stated that \u201cno final decisions are made by artificial intelligence\u201d and that tools don\u2019t refuse or recommend refusing applications.<\/p>\n
\u201cImmigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) uses advanced analytics tools to help sort applications based on set rules,\u201d they said. \u201cThese tools rely on machine learning to spot patterns in past decisions.\u201d<\/p>\n
But it\u2019s precisely these patterns that Petra Molnar questions.<\/p>\n
The author of The Walls Have Eyes: Surviving Migration in the Age of Artificial Intelligence and an associate director at the Refugee Law Lab at York University, Molnar warns that relying on past decisions can perpetuate bias and lead to unfair outcomes.<\/p>\n
\u201cTechnology is not neutral,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n
She added that the use of technology without proper oversight creates a risk of oversimplifying complex cases, such as those involving refugees and asylum seekers.<\/p>\n
\u201cAutomation also replicates structural discrimination and systemic racism, and applicants are rarely told how decisions about their lives are being made,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n
IRCC maintains that advanced analytics tools are continuously reviewed by employees who ensure that results are consistent with applications that receive a full human review.<\/p>\n
\u201cIdentifying and mitigating potential bias or discriminatory impacts is always a critical focus as we design, develop, and implement technologies,\u201d states the IRCC website<\/a>.<\/p>\n Calls for transparency Evgenia Parajanian\/Shutterstock<\/p>\n Experts also highlight the lack of transparency in how IRCC uses technology to process applications.<\/p>\n
\n![\"ircc\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/shutterstock_1631713054-EDITED.jpg\")
<\/p>\n