Source: International Bar Association

IRCC has used Chinook to assist officers in high‑volume temporary‑residence, study permit and work permit processing by displaying GCMS information in a more user‑friendly way. IRCC describes Chinook as a Microsoft Excel‑based Automated Decision Support (ADS) tool that, according to IRCC, does not use AI or advanced analytics, contains no decision‑making algorithms and does not make or recommend decisions. Federal Courts have tested whether decisions processed with Chinook nonetheless meet the post‑Vavilov administrative‑law requirements of reasonableness, transparency, intelligibility and procedural fairness.

The Federal Court decisions reported include Haghshenas v Canada (where the court rejected a generalised claim that AI produced a refusal and found the visa officer made the decision), Raja (where speculation that Chinook undermined fairness failed for lack of evidence connecting the tool to an omission), Safarian and Khosravi (where boilerplate or non‑responsive reasons led to decisions being set aside) and Mehrara (where a study‑permit refusal was set aside for inadequate reasons but the court did not find Chinook fettered discretion or by itself breached fairness). Courts require challengers to link the use of the tool to a concrete reviewable error; they have also cautioned that systematic deletion of Chinook‑generated material may impede meaningful judicial review. The practical lesson is that assisted tools may organise and speed processing but cannot substitute for an officer’s duty to meaningfully consider evidence and provide adequate reasons.