. . . It was up to her to ensure her passport was current and up to date - that includes the picture. . . .
Her passport was up to date.
http://www.ppt.gc.ca/support/faq.aspx?lang=eng&id=4005
Frequently asked questions
My appearance has changed. What should I do?
Although it is not mandatory, we do recommend that you obtain a new passport if your appearance has changed substantially, even if your passport is still valid. The intent of the photo is to accurately identify the person presenting his or her passport to border officials and prevent travelers from experiencing difficulties when travelling outside of Canada.
As to whether a passport photo looks like the holder - that's a very subjective standard - and the answer could be different depending on the person looking at the photo, the light in which the document is read and compared to the person, the perspective from which the border agent is looking at the person or whether the person is wearing different glasses/clothes from his photo. A photo on a piece of identification that bears only passing resemblance to the individual is not an unusual phenomenon - though if the photo is flattering, the subject is usually satisfied that it looks like him/her.
I dug out my expired passports and the individual in the photos varies widely in some of them - even in some that were isssued consecutively. I never thought that my appearance had changed that significantly back then. The last time I had my passport renewed it took three times for them to accept the photo. The first two times (all done by an experienced pro photographer who knew the guidelines) they were rejected because they said it did not meet the guidelines, though we were never able to find the faults that they said existed. The third time, before I submitted the application, I had the photos reviewed by a friend who worked at the local passport office (though it was not part of her job). Her main comment other than saying the photos looked acceptable was "that doesn't look anything like you".
Though $2.5m may seem like a overly greedy sum, in most cases the amount is not solely about compensation of direct losses. It should be noted that in civil actions the only punishment is the award of money. The government could say it's sorry but what does it really mean. In dealing with a bureaucracy (as with a business) the only sure way to get the attention of someone who has wronged you is to make it cost them money. Unless there is a threat of tangible punishment there would (IMO) be little incentive to conduct a proper investigation, correct any past wrongs and put in place protocols to ensure that it doesn't happen again.
As an added note, while reviewing my expired passports, I noticed a few Kenyan entry and exit stamps. Though some have commented that it was the Kenyan authorities who arrested her, my understanding of the circumstances (according to media accounts and thus far not refuted by the Canadian government) is that this woman's identity was first questioned by an airline employee and the Kenyan authorities only arrested her after Canadian officials said she was lying. (The DNA testing was not the Canadian High Commission's idea, it was the accused woman who argued for its use as proof of her identity) (
My experience at Nairobi JKIA is a few years old, so may be outdated) Depending on where this occurred in the airport (you had to check in at a couple of places) she 'may' have already passed Kenyan passport (exit) control who would have already accepted her passport and stamped it on the same page as the entry stamp. Big, big problems if you don't have an entry stamp when you are trying to leave.
