Bill C-37 · 39th Parliament · Stephen Harper
An Act to amend the Citizenship Act
Government bill. Became law.
- IntroducedDec. 10, 2007
- Debated in principleFeb. 7, 2008
- Studied by a committeeDone
- Passed its first chamberFeb. 15, 2008
- Passed the second chamberApril 15, 2008
- Became lawApril 17, 2008
Leading supporters
Ranked by the part each played: who is responsible for the bill, who carried it, and who spoke for it most.
- Stephen HarperPrime Minister
- Wilbert J. KeonSenate · Sponsor in the Senate
- Art EggletonSenate · SenatorThe bill restores citizenship to lost Canadians and should pass quickly, with observations for future improvements.
Who carries this bill
Arrows run from the person responsible to those who answer to them on this bill. The critic leads the Senate’s scrutiny and answers to no one on it.
Where members stand
Votes and debate for this bill have not been read yet.
How it changed on the way
73% of the text as introduced was changed or removed by the time it became law (3,803 words introduced, 2,934 passed).
substantial changeintent broadened
The bill gained a new grant of citizenship for certain stateless persons born outside Canada after the bill comes into force. The core restoration and deemed-citizenship rules stayed intact but were re-enacted with updated chapter numbering and assent details.
- Added a new citizenship grant for stateless persons with a bloodline connection.
After: “(5) The Minister shall, on application, grant citizenship to a person who Statelessness — bloodline connection (a) is born outside Canada after the coming into force of this subsection;”
How precisely it is written
mostly preciseChallenging the law: HardDisputing a charge: Moderate
The bill relies on exhaustive lists of specific Criminal Code and historical Citizenship Act provisions plus objective tests such as age under 23 and three years' residence. A few regulation-making clauses still delegate open-ended determinations to the Minister.
Open to argument
“providing for the circumstances in which the Minister shall determine that any of the requirements of subsections 5.1(1) and (2) are met”
Leaves the content of the test to future regulations rather than fixing it in the statute.“providing for the circumstances in which a review of an application under section 5.1 is suspended”
No statutory criteria; suspension power is undefined.
Clear-cut
“has resided in Canada for at least three years during the four years immediately before the date of his or her application”
Uses fixed numerical residency period and clear temporal window.“(i) a terrorism offence, as defined in section 2 of the Criminal Code, (ii) an offence under section 47, 51 or 52 of the Criminal Code”
Enumerates exact offences by section number instead of using general language such as 'serious crime'.“the person was born outside Canada before February 15, 1977 to a parent who was a citizen at the time of the birth”
Fixes a precise historical date and parental status at birth.
Discretion. Regulations under new paragraphs 27(d.2), (d.3) and (j.1) and the Minister's power to grant citizenship under subsection 5(5) leave significant implementation detail outside the statute.
Challenging the law itself. The text avoids subjective phrases such as 'in the opinion of the Minister' or 'likely to cause harm' and instead uses dated lists and numerical thresholds, reducing successful vagueness or overbreadth claims under section 7 of the Charter.
Disputing a charge under it. While the offence and residency rules are specific, disputes can still arise over historical citizenship records or whether a person meets one of the many enumerated transitional paragraphs.
Read by a language model from the royal assent text; every quoted phrase appears in the bill. A reading of the drafting, not legal advice.
Did it work?
partly effective
Bill C-37 restored or granted citizenship to the large majority of 'lost Canadians' (estimated 95% of cases) via automatic provisions effective April 2009, with remaining cases addressed through discretionary grants under s. 5(4), but left some cohorts unresolved until later amendments. Its first-generation limit on citizenship by descent was declared unconstitutional in 2023 by the Ontario Superior Court for violating Charter mobility and equality rights (ss. 6 and 15), leading to suspended invalidity and further legislative proposals.
- House of Commons Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, 40th Parliament, 2nd Session, Report 11 (June 2009)reviewBill C-37 resolved most lost Canadian cases automatically but did not cover all, with the Committee recommending accelerated discretionary grants for remaining applicants.
- Government Response to CIMM Report 11 (2009)reviewThe government affirmed that Bill C-37 resolved most lost Canadian cases and committed to processing remaining s. 5(4) applications quickly, noting over 180 approvals since 2007.
- Bjorkquist et al. v. Attorney General of Canada, 2023 ONSC 7152 (Ontario Superior Court of Justice)courtSections 3(3)(a) and 3(3)(b) of the Citizenship Act (first-generation limit enacted by Bill C-37) violate ss. 6 and 15 of the Charter and are of no force and effect.
- Canada.ca - SOCI appearance on Ontario Superior Court decision (December 2024)reviewThe government did not appeal the Bjorkquist ruling, introduced Bill C-71 to address the unconstitutional provisions, and extended the suspension of invalidity to allow remedial legislation.
Who lobbied on it
No lobbying registration naming this bill is loaded.
Stages and dates from LEGISinfo.