CCPR/C/116/D/2060/2011 concurrently, and 65 days’ presentence custody. In June 2007, upon completion of his sentence, the author was placed in immigration detention (“immigration hold”) while the Canada Border Services Agency made arrangements for his removal. While in detention, in late July and August 2007, the author was informed by the prison’s doctor that he had tested positive for HIV; his results for the Mantoux test for tuberculosis were also positive. His wife and the child born in 2003 were also diagnosed as being HIV-positive. 2.12 On 15 November 2007, the author and his wife submitted an application for permanent residence on humanitarian and compassionate (H&C) grounds. They alleged that the author, his wife and the daughter who was HIV-positive would not be able to obtain or to afford medical care and antiretroviral medications in Zimbabwe; that the political and socioeconomic situation in Zimbabwe was very poor, including the human rights situation; that as failed asylum seekers they would be severely mistreated; and that it was in the best interest of their seven children that they remain together as a family in Canada. 2.13 On 19 November 2007, the author requested deferral of his removal from Canada until his humanitarian and compassionate application had been determined. On 5 December, the Canada Border Services Agency enforcement officer denied the request. The officer noted that a medical doctor had determined that the author’s immune system was fully functional despite his HIV-positive status and that he had not yet started taking antiretroviral medications, and that according to documents submitted by the author, those medications were available in Zimbabwe and he could therefore access them, despite their cost. The officer also noted that the author had made no submissions regarding his involvement in the upbringing of his children, and that the children were under the care of their mother and under the supervision of the Durham Children’s Aid Society, by order of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. Furthermore, his removal would only maintain the status quo given that he had been separated from his family since 10 February 2007 as a result of his incarceration. His removal was scheduled for 8 January 2008. 2.14 On 12 December 2007, the author submitted to the Federal Court an application for leave and judicial review of the decision not to defer his removal, pending the humanitarian and compassionate application. As a result, his removal was stayed by the Federal Court. In March 2008, the author was released from detention. He claimed that he had had regular telephone contact with his wife and children while in detention. On 7 July, the Federal Court dismissed the author’s application for judicial review. It found no reviewable error in the enforcement officer’s decision that the author should be removed. 2.15 On 13 August 2008, another removal order was issued by the Canada Border Services Agency. On 26 August, an Agency enforcement officer denied his request to defer removal. On 29 August, the author submitted to the Federal Court another application for leave and judicial review of the decision not to defer his removal to his country of origin, pending the humanitarian and compassionate application. On 29 January 2009, the author was again detained. On 17 February, the Federal Court set aside the enforcement officer’s decision and the author’s removal was stayed until a decision had been reached on his humanitarian and compassionate application. In October, the author was released from detention upon payment of a cash bond. 2.16 On 27 November 2009, Citizenship and Immigration Canada decided to grant a residence permit on humanitarian and compassionate grounds to the author’s wife and their three non-Canadian children; however, the author’s humanitarian and compassionate application was denied. The agency maintained that although the author’s removal would cause the author to be permanently separated from his wife and seven children, his application was inadmissible on the ground of serious criminality, pursuant to subsection 25 (1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Notably, the author had a history of committing fraud-related crimes both in Canada and in the United States; there was no evidence that he had made any rehabilitative efforts; his behaviour showed a pattern of 4