Three Richmond women appeared before a provincial court judge Friday for a sentencing hearing related to their involvement in a large-scale, Richmond-based immigration scam that has already sent their former employer Xu “Sunny” Wang to prison for seven years.

The Richmond News understands that the nearly 1,200 clients Wang and the women — Ming Kun “Makkie” Wu, Jin “Fanny” Ma, Wen “Vvian” Jiang — assisted are now under investigation by Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) to determine the validity of their residency and citzenship.

article continues below

The investigations come as IRCC has substantially increased citizenship revocations over the past year as a result of new laws passed by the former Conservative government.

IRCC spokesperson Nancy Caron would not explicitly confirm the 1,200 clients are under investigation. She did, however, state that IRCC investigates all cases related to immigration fraud.

Between 2006 and 2013, Wang, with the help of seven employees, including the three women, used his two unlicensed immigration consulting businesses, New Can Consultants Ltd. and Wellong International Investments Ltd., to forge documents and falsify Chinese passports to help clients obtain permanent residency — the precursor to citizenship.

Last October, Wang was also found guilty of tax evasion after collecting about $10 million from his clients and not declaring his income (while collecting low-income benefits).

A sentencing decision on Wu, Ma and Jiang, who also pled guilty to immigration fraud and tax evasion offences, is expected in early January.

In May 2015, new laws granted IRCC new powers to revoke citizenship. Prior to this, a judge was required. After just 15 people had their citizenship revoked in 2014, 131 met the same fate in 2015. To June of this year, 104 cases were successfully processed, according to IRCC.

“The previous process was slow and labour-intensive and led to an increasing inventory of cases. The current process was designed to enable IRCC to make decisions on the vast majority of revocation cases in a more efficient and timely manner,” stated Caron, via email.

Caron said the uptick in revocations began around November 2015, after IRCC was able to send out notices of intent following the changes to the law.

The changes in procedure are presently being challenged by the B.C. Civil Liberties Association at the Federal Court of Canada.

BCCLA lawyer Laura Track said IRCC bureaucrats should not be revoking citizenship. That decision should be made by an independent judge.

“We say that when the consequence is as serious as a loss of citizenship, an individual should have the right to have that decision made by an impartial judge,” said Track.

In many cases, a person may not apply for a hearing, said Track, but the option should nevertheless be available.

Track said IRCC doesn’t take into account extraneous circumstances, such as humanitarian reasons. However, Caron said the process does allow a person to submit additional information, such as details of their personal circumstances or ties to Canada.

“In many cases, the evidence is straightforward and individuals who have provided submissions do not attempt to counter the evidence,” said Caron.

Wang’s clients were described by a federal prosecutor as “well-to-do” foreign nationals willing to pay for fraud to get into Canada.

Wang’s activities were initially uncovered by immigration officials who found inconsistencies in his clients’ home addresses.

Caron also credits “large-scale fraud investigations led by our RCMP and Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) partners. “These investigations led to criminal convictions of several immigration consultants. Notices of intent to revoke citizenship were sent to their clients who had provided fraudulent documents to suggest that they were living in Canada when they were living abroad,” said Caron. But despite successes, a May 2016 report by Canada’s Auditor General determined the federal government has not been adequately detecting and preventing citizenship fraud in part because the immigration department, along with the RCMP and CBSA, have failed to adequately share information.