Bangladeshi asylum seeker detained in US as Canada refuses return

(UNITED STATES / CANADA (BORDER REGION NEAR MONTREAL)) A 28-year-old Bangladeshi asylum seeker has spent nearly six months in US detention after he says he unintentionally crossed the border near Montreal and turned himself in to American officials. The man, identified by his lawyer as Mahin Shahriar, had been living in Canada under temporary status after arriving in 2019 to seek refuge. His case now sits at the intersection of two countries’ policies, as Canada refuses return while U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) continues to hold him.

Shahriar’s lawyer, Washim Ahmed, says his client crossed into the United States 🇺🇸 by mistake during a visit to a rural area outside Montreal to meet an acquaintance. Realizing he had left Canadian territory, Shahriar approached U.S. border authorities, who detained him.

Ahmed argues Canada 🇨🇦 should accept Shahriar back under the Safe Third Country Agreement (STCA), pointing to Shahriar’s residence in Canada and family members who still hold valid Canadian status. Canadian officials, however, have refused to take him back, according to Ahmed, leaving Shahriar stuck in a legal gap. He is now reportedly barred from returning to Canada at all, despite his previous ties there.

ICE has acknowledged that Shahriar could face harm if deported to Bangladesh, his lawyer says, but the U.S. agency also cannot force Canada to readmit him.

Legal standoff under the Safe Third Country Agreement

At the heart of the dispute is the Safe Third Country Agreement, a bilateral pact that requires asylum seekers to request protection in the first safe country they arrive in—either the United States or Canada. The rule is meant to manage where people file claims, but it has long faced court challenges and strong criticism from refugee advocates who say it can trap people in unsafe or unfair situations.

Official guidance on the agreement is published by the Government of Canada and explains the core rule and limited exceptions for claimants at the land border; readers can review it directly on the Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada website: Safe Third Country Agreement.

Ahmed contends that because Shahriar had been living in Canada since 2019, and has close family with valid Canadian status, Canadian authorities should take him back from U.S. custody. He has:

1. Petitioned Canada’s public safety minister.
2. Pursued a judicial review aimed at compelling the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) to step in on humanitarian and compassionate grounds.

While those steps move through Canadian channels, Shahriar remains in ICE custody on the U.S. side of the border.

According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, cases like Shahriar’s reveal how border decisions can create long detentions even when neither country disputes the person’s identity. The site notes that the STCA’s rigid structure often leaves little room for on-the-spot discretion when someone has a prior Canadian history yet ends up on U.S. soil, even unintentionally.

Shahriar’s original refugee claim in Canada was rejected, his lawyer says, after he followed fraudulent advice from a consultant. That left him in a precarious legal position despite his ongoing ties in Canada. He was living under temporary status before the border incident near Montreal that led to his arrest by U.S. officials. The rejection of his claim also complicates efforts to return him to Canada now, even though he reportedly fears harm if sent back to Bangladesh.

“The STCA can leave people caught between two systems with no quick fix,” advocates say, highlighting how the agreement does not clearly address accidental cross-border return requests by people with prior ties in the neighboring country.

Human impact and next steps

As of October 2025, Shahriar remains in detention, unsure of when he might be released or where he can legally live. For people in similar situations, extended custody often causes:

• High stress and poor sleep
• Constant uncertainty about legal status
• Difficulty sustaining family support across borders

Friends and relatives in Canada may visit or send messages, but long, undefined timelines make consistent support harder. In cross-border cases, distance also increases practical and legal barriers to coordination.

Ahmed says ICE has recognized the risk Shahriar could face if removed to Bangladesh but has limited tools to resolve the standoff. Key points about the authorities’ roles:

• U.S. authorities (ICE) can detain, process, or release an individual, but cannot compel Canada to readmit a person.
• Canadian authorities (CBSA and federal government) control re-entry and can decide whether to facilitate return—even for someone who formerly lived legally in Canada.

Advocates say this case exemplifies the STCA’s unresolved gaps. The agreement directs where asylum claims should be heard but does not specify what should happen when someone who lived in one country ends up in the other by accident and asks to go back.

Legal options and likely timeline

For those seeking help, the main options include:

• Contacting legal aid groups and refugee organizations for guidance under Canadian and U.S. law.
• Pursuing judicial review in Canada to compel CBSA action on humanitarian and compassionate grounds.
• Requesting ICE release conditions in the U.S. while foreign legal steps proceed.

Organizations often cited for support include the Canadian Council for Refugees and other legal services that track court rulings and policy changes. These groups can advise on required documents, timelines, and prospects for success.

Factors affecting the outcome:

• Strength of the administrative record and humanitarian arguments in court
• Whether officials followed law and policy fairly
• Coordination (or lack thereof) between U.S. and Canadian agencies

Court reviews can take months, so Shahriar’s detention may continue unless U.S. authorities choose to release him while legal proceedings in Canada progress.

Broader policy debate

The STCA remains controversial:

• Critics argue it blocks people from reaching support networks in the country where they have ties, even when claims and risk are not disputed.
• Supporters say it helps manage border flows and discourages repeat claims.

Courts in both countries have examined the agreement over the years, reflecting the challenge of balancing border control with fair access to protection.

Shahriar’s case underscores those tensions: a Bangladeshi asylum seeker who attempted to follow the rules after a border mistake now faces an open-ended wait behind bars. His lawyer presses Canada to act, while the U.S. holds him and says it cannot force a cross-border solution. Until an agency or court intervenes, the standoff will likely continue to test the limits of the agreement and the patience of a man who has already waited almost half a year for an answer.