Chinese police officer and wife denied residency in ‘crimes against humanity’ ruling

A Chinese couple have lost a bid to immigrate to Canada after a Federal Court judge agreed there are reasonable grounds to believe the police officer husband was complicit in crimes against humanity.

The ruling issued last Friday says the husband, a senior police officer with China’s Public Security Bureau in Hebei province, told immigration officials he has supervised up to 150 people throughout his career and overseen “investigations, interrogations, and detentions.”

He says he never “abused or mistreated suspects” and instead his role was to ensure interrogations were conducted based on the law.

His wife, named Li Li, had sought Canadian permanent residency in 2016, along with her husband and their child, who are not named in the ruling.

But the Federal Court ruling says an Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada officer denied the application in September 2024 after issuing a letter saying there were reasonable grounds to believe her husband’s 30-year police career “led him to be complicit in crimes against humanity.”

The court ruling on Li’s application for a judicial review says that although the immigration officer recognized Li’s husband “could not be linked personally to any specific instance of torture,” the systematic nature of torture in interrogations in Hebei and his supervisory position meant the grounds for rejection were reasonable.

“The officer’s conclusion does not presume knowledge of the entirety of the (Public Security Bureau’s) operations throughout China, instead the analysis is tailored to the specific position the applicant’s spouse held within the (bureau) in Hebei,” wrote Justice Shirzad Ahmed after a hearing in Saskatoon.

The ruling says the 2024 letter to the couple outlined concerns about Li’s husband, stating that torture and human rights violations are systematic in China and known to occur “nationwide” during the interrogations of criminal suspects, including in Hebei.

Ahmed’s ruling says if an accompanying family member of an applicant is inadmissible, then the applicant is generally also inadmissible.

The judge says the officer’s decision was “justified, intelligible, and transparent,” dismissing Li’s application for review.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Mar. 18, 2026.

Nono Shen, The Canadian Press