How a B.C. immigration fraud case crumbled due to court delays

Judge found Crown’s estimated time for trial ‘woefully inadequate’

It was a five-year investigation that the Canada Border Services Agency said showed its commitment to protecting Canadians and prospective immigrants.

In 2020, the CBSA announced Project Husky (new window) had shut down a large-scale alleged immigration fraud scheme with a Yukon government employee and four British Columbia residents facing charges.

The suspects promised Canadian immigration to dozens of Chinese nationals who invested millions of dollars and were humiliated when they discovered the truth, court documents alleged.

Four years later, Project Husky has all but died in the courts, with a not-guilty verdict and stays of proceedings.

The latest blow happened last month when Tzu Chun Joyce Chang had all charges against her stayed due to court delays. A B.C. Provincial Court judge called the time federal prosecutors scheduled for the trial woefully inadequate.

Chang was found guilty in 2023 of 11 charges but her lawyer brought forward an application under the Supreme Court of Canada’s Jordan decision, arguing Chang’s right to be tried within a reasonable time was violated. As a result, the guilty verdicts were never entered into the court record.

Chang and her lawyer declined to comment on this story.

The failure to schedule adequate time to complete the trial had a cascading effect leading to delays that were avoidable, or at least could have been minimized, had the trial been scheduled properly, said Provincial Court Judge Bonnie Craig in a decision.

Charges against the other accused didn’t result in convictions either. The government employee died about two weeks after charges were laid, according to the ruling. Two others have had charges stayed and one was found not guilty.

25-month trial delay ‘not justified’: judge

Craig ordered the stay of proceedings on all counts against Chang, finding her right to be tried within a reasonable time under the Charter was violated.

She placed a lot of the blame on federal prosecutors who estimated the trial, involving four co-accused, a language interpreter and almost 20,000 documents, would take 12 days.

In 2016, in what is known as the Jordan decision, the Supreme Court of Canada set a limit of 18 months for cases tried in provincial court and 30 months for cases tried in superior courts.

Charges against Chang were first laid in November 2020 and included fraud on the government and misrepresenting immigration information. It took 34 months and 29 days for the trial to be completed, Craig found.

Craig deducted several months for unforeseeable and reasonably unavoidable issues, including the withdrawal of Chang’s lawyer, bringing down the total trial time to 25 months and two days, still easily smashing the ceiling set by Jordan.

I find that the delay of 25 months and [two] days was not justified, Craig said.

The Crown argued it had estimated 12 days for its arguments alone but the judge ultimately found the estimate was for the entirety of the trial.

I cannot understand how the Crown ever expected to complete the trial within the allotted time, Craig said in her decision.

Even if leeway was granted for the original underestimate, when it became clear that the trial could not complete in time, the Crown was required to be proactive in seeking continuation dates, and accurately assessing the extra time needed.

The Public Prosecution Service of Canada declined a request for comment from CBC News, but noted it can still appeal the decision.

The office of Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc, whose ministry is in charge of the CBSA, said given the matter is still in the appeal period, we will refrain from commenting.

CBC News requested an interview with federal Immigration Minister Marc Miller but was referred to the border agency. The CBSA said an interview was not possible and did not provide a written response by deadline.

How the alleged scheme worked

The alleged immigration fraud scheme centred around permanent residency applications. The CBSA said Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada officials identified suspicious documents submitted as part of those applications.

They appeared to be nomination certificates from the Government of Yukon issued under the Yukon Business Nominee Program, a program designed for foreign entrepreneurs interested in owning a business in Yukon and gaining permanent residency.

The Yukon government, however, confirmed to CBSA that the documents were fake.

None of the applications were approved and no one got permanent resident status as a result of the alleged scheme, according to CBSA.

Court documents allege Chang committed offences under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act both personally and by directing employees of her company, USA-Canada International Investment (UCII).

The Crown alleged Chang and UCII represented 70 Chinese nationals in their applications for permanent residency without authorization. Chang told private immigration agents in China about a new or special program under the Yukon Business Nominee Program with reduced eligibility requirements, court heard.

Millions invested, diverted

Prosecutors alleged the false information enticed Chinese nationals to apply for permanent residency and to invest millions of dollars into UCII.

Banking records show that between December 2010 and May 2015, almost $7.8 million was transferred into UCII’s account from the YBNP applicants, according to Craig.

Chang denied committing the offences. She said she did not represent the 70 applicants and that she and her employees provided translation services, acting as a conduit between the immigration hopefuls and their agents.

But in December 2023, Chang was found guilty of all 11 charges against her. Craig found she was not credible or reliable, and presented inconsistent evidence.

Chang was found to have redirected about $2,841,000 from the UCII account to other companies from 2013 to 2015, most of which had no apparent connection to the Yukon, according to court documents. Chang said in cross-examination that she controlled at least some of these companies.

Clients ‘humiliated and embarrassed’

While the criminal case hasn’t come to fruition, a civil lawsuit against Chang, UCII and others accused in the scheme is still ongoing with more than 50 plaintiffs.

The lawsuit alleges that in 2015, dozens of clients of a Chinese immigration consultancy company were called to the Canadian immigration services office in Hong Kong.

Immigration agents told them their certificates of nomination were false or invalid and that their permanent residency cards were denied.

The clients were humiliated and embarrassed, according to the lawsuit.

Some, if not all, of the applicants who withdrew their applications following the interviews had been banned from re-applying to immigrate or visit Canada for at least five years, the lawsuit said.

The Chinese immigration service allegedly raised over $10 million in client funds and forwarded it to UCII, according to the lawsuit.

None of the allegations have been proven in court.

In a response to the notice of civil claim, UCII denied the allegations against Chang and said clients who made investments were aware of considerable risk that they might not get immigration or residency status.

This article is republished from RCI.