authorized by the State. The concept includes presence that is explicitly authorized, as well as presence that is known and not prohibited, while taking into account all personal circumstances of the individual.”476 Lawfully “includes stateless persons who had lawfully entered a country whose permission to stay had not elapsed or those who have entered the country unlawfully and had subsequently obtained permission to stay.”477 What constitutes “public order” within the meaning of Article 31 is largely within the domain of the State party to determine. It could include persons convicted of serious crimes, but not for “social grounds”, such as indigence, illness, or disability.478 In regards to Article 31(2) of the 1954 Convention, stateless persons who are accused of breaches to public order and national security are to be given the opportunity and resources to submit evidence to clear them of the allegations. It is only in “compelling” circumstances, or in such serious and unusual cases, that due process of law and procedural guarantees not be applied.479 Expulsion is considered an exceptional measure for persons who are unable to leave the country of their own volition.480 As a result, a final decision of expulsion does not result in an immediate expulsion and Article 31(3) provides stateless persons with a period of time to seek admission to another country.481 Furthermore, since Article 31(3) places an obligation on a stateless person to seek “legal” admission to another country, it is assumed that the expelling state is not authorized to expel a stateless person to a country that does not agree to accept them.482 It is in cases where no country is willing to accept the stateless person and they are required to stay in the country, that the country the stateless person is in “may apply such restrictions as are necessary…to safeguard the interests of the state.”483 It was observed at the conference on the 1954 Convention that given the nature of de jure statelessness, an expulsion order would probably rarely be executed against a stateless person.484 II. Canadian Legal Framework a. Articles 31(1) & 31(2) Foreign nationals who do not have a legal status in Canada are obliged to leave. 485 Where there are reasonable grounds to believe that a foreign national is inadmissible, they may be subject to a hearing before the Immigration Division of the IRB to determine their inadmissibility and issue a removal order.486 Grounds of inadmissibility that may result in a foreign national being subject to Handbook on Stateless Persons, supra note 12 at para. 135 & fn 80. Robinson Commentary to the 1954 Convention, supra note 11 at 61. 478 Ibid. 479 Ibid. 480 Ibid. 481 Ibid. 482 Ibid., at 62. 483 Ibid., at 63. 484 Comment by the German representative in ibid., at 62. 485 IRPA, supra note 20 at s. 49. This includes those whose “lawful status” has expired, and therefore, are required to leave Canada upon expiration. See also Statelessness in the Canadian Context, supra note 4 at 53. 486 IRPA, ibid., at ss. 44(2) & 45(d), and IRPR, supra note 21 at s. 228 476 477 100