I travelled to Geneva to participate in the Global Refugee Forum Progress Review 2025 as a Rainbow Railroad delegate.
I travelled on a Canadian Refugee Travel Document (RTD). My RTD was issued by the same government that accepted my claim for protection. That protection allows me to live, work, pay taxes, and contribute to public life in Canada.
RTDs and airline systems
Before departure, I was unable to generate a boarding pass online. The airline’s system could not process my RTD, a document Canada issues but does not appear to have fully operationalized across its own travel infrastructure.
At the airport, Air Canada staff were exceptional. The agent was visibly frustrated for me, apologizing for the limitations of the system, asking for patience at the check-in counter as he facilitated necessary back-office processing.
About 10 minutes later, I was cleared to travel.
He apologized again.
Yes, there was a delay, but it felt dignified.
Immigration processing in Switzerland
I travelled to Geneva via Zurich.
Given horror stories I heard from refugees about entering foreign countries on an RTD, I was nervous about what the immigration process would be like upon entry to Switzerland.
But when I arrived in Zurich, immigration processing was seamless. The officer asked the reason for my travel. I told her I was attending the Global Refugee Forum. She scanned my RTD, asked me to scan my right index and middle fingers, returned my document, then waved me through. No delay. No suspicion. No additional screening. I quipped to my colleague that some days the system seems to like refugees.
The pain of Pearson
For my return trip, I was actually able to generate my own boarding pass, which felt liberating.
Then I landed at Pearson.
I scanned my document at the border services kiosk three times, but it was not able to completely process my RTD, so it did not issue a receipt. I proceeded to the border agent.
She asked where I was coming from and I said Geneva, via Zurich. She scanned my RTD, completed what I believe is a secondary inspection referral form, handed it to me, then instructed me to proceed to immigration for additional screening.
So I did.
While I remained stoic and calm, the indignity and shame of the stares that met me from the moment the border agent directed me to immigration, reminded me of a time at university when a group of men yelled homophobic slurs at me as I walked along an open pathway.
When I arrived in the immigration section, the officer examined my document and asked, “What is your reason for travelling to Canada?”
I replied, “I live here.” What I didn’t say aloud was “I thought only refugees who reside in Canada could posses a Canadian RTD.”
As he processed my document, we spoke briefly about the Global Refugee Forum Progress Review, about Geneva generally, and how unreliable Uber service is there. Then he told me he needed to conduct further checks and asked me to take a seat.
I was filled with an overwhelming feeling of vulnerability (not the strong kind), but writing kept me grounded. And I knew I would transform this undignified experience into a powerful narrative that I hope will inspire change.
Cleared to live in Canada again
About 15 minutes later, the immigration officer called me back to the counter.
He told me I was cleared to enter Canada and then added that because of where I am in my refugee process, every time I travel and re-enter Canada, I will be subject to additional screening.
Good to know, but I asked why.
He explained that sometimes immigration officers “catch” refugees who travel back to the country they fled.
I asked him calmly why I would do that.
He said he wasn’t suggesting I would. But that others have. And often enough that the system is designed this way. So, Canada grants me protection, issues a travel document, but treats my return as inherently suspect.
What I really could not reconcile though, is this: why the country that accepted my request for protection and issued my travel document requires more scrutiny than the country I was visiting.
I imagine some refugees may have reasons to reavail themselves to a state they fled. I do not. Not after decades of persecution and violence. Not after hiding. And, certainly not after experiencing what it feels like to live in a country that honours the most important parts of who I am.
Do I wish that same country would honour my refugee identity with equal dignity? Absolutely.
Full obligations. Partial dignity.
Instead, refugees live in a permanent administrative ambiguity, trusted enough to contribute, but not trusted enough to move without suspicion.
While immigration systems scrutinize my movement, the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) does not question my legitimacy. CRA recognizes me enough to tax my income, enforce compliance, and expects full participation in Canada’s fiscal system. There is no administrative ambiguity there.
Further, the irony is not lost on me that this experience occurred on a trip from the Global Refugee Forum Progress Review, a space dedicated to “expanding support for refugees and the countries – including Canada – who receive them”, and to do so with Meaningful Refugee Participation.
Considerations for policymakers
If policymakers are serious about refugee inclusion, I urge them to consider the following.
- Design dignified travel and re-entry protocols for refugees.
- Facilitate operational alignment across departments, so RTDs issued by Canada function the way passports do for international travel and re-entry.
- Learn from jurisdictions that do this better, including Switzerland’s efficient, respectful processing of RTDs.
And, to quote Prime Minister Mark Carney who delivered the keynote at the recent Equal Voice Gala: “fill the gap between rhetoric and failure”. Canada is celebrated as a global leader in refugee protection, but there is clearly more need for dignity in its infrastructure beyond rhetoric.
Refugee participation without mobility dignity is performative. And protection without trust is incomplete.
If refugees are credible enough to shape global policy, we must be credible enough to move without inherent suspicion. And, systems should be designed accordingly.
Next time?
I will continue to advocate for change. But I am also pragmatic. So while that advocacy continues, the next time I travel, I will not waste my time in front of a kiosk that has already told me it cannot recognize me.
I will walk directly to an officer, present my Canadian Refugee Travel Document, and state plainly that I need to proceed to immigration for processing. This is how I can find agency in an undignified system. I will do so without the shame and indignity I felt this first time, because I have accepted that this is how the system currently operates. And, my acceptance is not acquiescence. It’s pragmatism with agency.
I will move through the process calmly with confidence while I advocate for a system that aligns protection with trust, and security with dignity. And I will continue to ask why Canada has not yet learned what Switzerland appears to have operationalized with ease: that Refugee Travel Documents are valid documents, and that refugees can be processed with respect without compromising security.
Final thoughts
The lesson I’ve learned from this experience is another reminder of why I centre lived expertise in leadership. It is a reminder that as a refugee leader living in Canada, I must navigate what exists, as I work relentlessly to change policy and systems.
On the bright side, at the end of my pain at Pearson, my bag was waiting for me at carousel #8.
Latoya Nugent 
Thoughts?