II. Canadian Legal Framework There are no clear legislative provisions in the IRPA, or any specific jurisprudence discussing Article 25 of the 1951 Refugee Convention. However, with respect to Article 25(2), the travaux préparatoires of the 1951 Refugee Convention observed that in common law jurisdictions, such as Canada, personal affidavits would be acceptable in lieu of original documents.446 Although such affidavits would not be given the “same validity” as instruments issued by the national authorities, they are to be given credence in the absence of proof to the contrary.447 In Canadian jurisprudence on this matter involving refugees, this principle has also been observed “when a refugee claimant swears to the truth of certain allegations, a presumption is created that those allegations are true unless there are reasons to doubt their truthfulness.”448 In addition, when the CBSA is attempting to establish a foreign national’s identity, they may contact authorities in the individual’s country of origin or last habitual residence. This may be so the foreign national can be released from detention or to obtain a travel document in order to remove the foreign national from Canada.449 With respect to assistance gathering documentation specifically on family position, social position or professional certifications, no legislative or policy guidelines were found. Article 25(5) of the 1954 Convention makes it clear that although “the issuance of identity papers and travel documents is ordinarily included in ‘administrative assistance,’” it is not applicable to these two services.450 Nonetheless, Guy Goodwin-Gill is of the opinion that Article 25 of the 1951 Refugee Convention may need to be read together with Articles 27 and 28, “as part of single system of protection of the person’s entitlement to identity and documentation, since practically speaking the issuance of identity documents under Article 27 may be contingent on the issuance and acceptance of the necessary antecedent documents under Article 25, relating, for example, to births and deaths, marriages and civil status generally.”451 III. Assessment The IRPA and the IRPR do not explicitly address the content of Article 25, nor is there jurisprudence or any clear policy guidelines on the issue of the right to administrative assistance in Canada. This is despite Canada being a State Party to the 1951 Refugee Convention, which contains the same Article 25 provision. Although this could be considered a possible gap in the Canadian legal framework, the content of Article 25 is unique as it addresses issues for stateless 1951 Convention travaux préparatoires, supra note 61 at 59 & 61. Robinson Commentary to the 1954 Convention, supra note 11 at 48. 448 Maldonado v. Minister for Employment and Immigration (1980) 2 FC 302 at 305; cited in UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), Opinion: The 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and the Obligations of States under Articles 25, 27 and 28, with particular reference to refugees without identity or travel documents, May 2000, at paras. 30-37, available at: http://www.refworld.org/docid/51af00184.html [Guy GoodwinGill Opinion] 449 Citizenship and Immigration Canada, ENF 10 Removals (31 March 2013), at 50, available at: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/manuals/enf/enf10-eng.pdf; and IRPR, supra note 21 at s. 244(c) & 247. 450 Robinson Commentary to the 1954 Convention, supra note 11 at 48. 451 Guy Goodwin-Gill Opinion, supra 448 at para. 37. 446 447 94