What is the effect of not having counsel at a vacation and reconsideration hearing?

I will deal first with the issues of natural justice and procedural fairness. In my view, the applicant was properly notified of his right to counsel. The applicant was sent three notices to appear at the vacation and reconsideration hearing. In each notice, it specifically states that the applicant has a right to be represented by counsel at his own expense. The notices also indicate the nature of the proceedings and inform the applicant that more information may be obtained by contacting the Registrar. I make this ruling, accepting that the applicant has little education and no knowledge of the Canadian legal process. However, the applicant was asked at the beginning of the hearing if he intended to have counsel, and he stated that he did not and that he was ready to proceed. Later in the hearing, the applicant indicated he had his own reasons why he did not want to be represented by counsel. It appears that the applicant was concerned that counsel would extend the length of time required to complete the hearing. Since the applicant had ample opportunity to obtain and instruct counsel and failed to do so without any reasonable excuse, the absence of counsel does not amount to a denial of a fair hearing: see Siloch v. M.E.I. (1993), 18 Imm. L.R. (2d) 239 (F.C.A.).