Hi everyone
I found out a lot of helpful information here
looking for some info for a friend who is a protected permanent resident has renewed passport 3 times and traveled several times to backhome did not know abt not getting backhome passport or travel restrictions went for family emergencies and some situations changes though not compltely out of danger in back home but having pr made her think she is proected.
she is now considering her options as she is married and settled with a kid in canada husband owns a bussiness kid is going to school she works as well.
Can she renounce her pr and get sponsored by her husband? She will not travel now that she found out ant ceseation but there is nothing that can b done for her past travels
so she wants to b upfront with immigration and tell them and get change of status if thats possible
Also just wondering if there is anyone who got ceaseated and came back to canada and any details abt auch cases
thanks
Probably best to at least consult with a reputable and competent immigration lawyer who engages in refugee law.
Some observations otherwise:
If NO cessation proceedings have been initiated so far, there is no obligation to bring this to the attention of IRCC or CBSA.
It might be difficult to be sure that CBSA did not make a referral to investigate potential reavailment during a recent re-entry into Canada from abroad; but if she was not questioned much about her travel and being in her home country, odds are good there is no pending investigation.
If there is no sign of a pending investigation, as long as the refugee-PR stays in Canada and does not apply for citizenship, so far as we see the odds are very good that the PR is not at risk a reavailment/cessation investigation or proceeding will be initiated.
Beyond that, in terms of what to do to "
fix" things going forward, to more or less keep or obtain status that cannot be subject to cessation, again better to see a lawyer . . . otherwise, I have the sense there are a couple approaches that should work, BUT my sense is NOT worth much.
I am not an expert. So, for example, there's the approach you described, renouncing PR status and being sponsored to become a PR. My sense is that would work to avoid the risk of cessation proceedings. But again (sorry about being so repetitive, but this is worth emphasizing), better to see a lawyer before relying on that.
I am tempted to suggest another option, to simply NO longer travel using the home country passport and WAIT for five years PAST the date her last passport expired, and THEN apply for citizenship. The applicant will need to explain why they do not have any passport they could have used during the preceding five years, but the answer is easy: just state that they do not have a passport because they are a refugee, or that they are a protected person. My guess, emphasizing however it is a guess, is that this would NOT trigger concern about reavailment, the citizenship application not indicating cause for such concerns given the lack of travel and no passport within the eligibility period. This involves long term planning, waiting, and given the vagaries of human life, and the not-so-enduring nature of marital relationships (
stuff happens, and that can include not just divorces but accidental death, and so on), some risk of not having the fall-back insurance of being sponsored if PR status is lost or renounced in the meantime (due to cessation proceedings being initiated).
CAUTION: it is apparent some PR-refugees have engaged in obtaining a home country passport and travel to the home country, and done so within the five years prior to applying for citizenship, and successfully applied for citizenship, their application not derailed by a referral to CBSA for a reavailment investigation. One does not need to be a lawyer to recognize that approach is RISKY. Both CBSA and IRCC tend to be lenient in many ways, but the exercise of such leniency toward some should never be taken to be assurance another PR will likewise benefit from such leniency.
It is apparent that enforcement of the reavailment provisions varies. A lot of potential reavailment/cessation cases are never investigated let alone prosecuted. We really have little idea what will trigger a reavailment/cessation investigation or actually lead to cessation proceedings.
BUT the consequences, if subject to cessation, are so severe those affected should be very cautious, very, very cautious. For the individual you are asking about, it appears at least they have some insurance, the fall-back spousal sponsorship approach to regaining PR status should it be lost (or renounced to avoid a lengthy, tending to be very lengthy, cessation process).
