Post 10/11 CIC/IRCC - What did not change/remained the same?

[HamiltonApplicant]

These two provisions remain unchanged:

• Police certificate(s) (as required) - You are required to provide a police certificate for each country, other than Canada, where you were present for a total of 183 days or more during the four (4) years immediately before the date of your application.

• Maintaining requirements for citizenship from Application to oath: applicants to maintain the requirements for citizenship from the time they apply for citizenship until taking the Oath of Citizenship only applied to applications received on or after June 11, 2015.

 

[TESTV]

I called the IRCC today and a gentleman agent told me it will be changed to 3 years.

 

[dpenabill]

I called the IRCC today and a gentleman agent told me it will be changed to 3 years.

What will be changed to 3 years?

Answer: It is the minimum physical presence requirement that is changing to three years.

Whether IRCC will continue to require some applicants to include a police certificate, including who, when, and why, is an administrative matter.

There is nothing in the Bill C-6 changes which affects the four year prohibitions time period, so there is no reason to anticipate any changes as to who IRCC requires to include a police certificate with the application.

That is, there is no guarantee the time period for calculating who must include a police certificate (or explain why not) will continue to be four years, but this is something which is NOT at all likely to change.

 

[itsmyid]

I called the IRCC today and a gentleman agent told me it will be changed to 3 years.

Very likely that gentleman thought you were asking about the residency requirement since that's the big change, we will find out in a week and put it to rest forever, instead of getting this question at least twice a day ....

 

[TESTV]

What will be changed to 3 years?

Answer: It is the minimum physical presence requirement that is changing to three years.

Whether IRCC will continue to require some applicants to include a police certificate, including who, when, and why, is an administrative matter.

There is nothing in the Bill C-6 changes which affects the four year prohibitions time period, so there is no reason to anticipate any changes as to who IRCC requires to include a police certificate with the application.

That is, there is no guarantee the time period for calculating who must include a police certificate (or explain why not) will continue to be four years, but this is something which is NOT at all likely to change.

specifically asked and confirmed it is about the Police Certificate.

 

[TESTV]

Very likely that gentleman thought you were asking about the residency requirement since that's the big change, we will find out in a week and put it to rest forever, instead of getting this question at least twice a day ....

no, specifically asked and confirmed it is about the Police Certificate. Even give him my example.

 

[itsmyid]

no, specifically asked and confirmed it is about the Police Certificate. Even give him my example.

Those agents answering the phone don't necessarily know everything correctly, many people had experienced different answers when calling at different time/with different people. I have had that experience during my PR application a few years ago, so I don't really put too much trust in the information from the call agent. Just give it a week we will know for sure with no more guessing - it's less than a week now

 

[HamiltonApplicant]

no, specifically asked and confirmed it is about the Police Certificate. Even give him my example.

This is what CIC (http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/information/applications/guides/CIT0002ETOC.asp#CIT0002E4) says

9. Police certificate(s) (as required)
You are required to provide a police certificate for each country, other than Canada, where you were present for a total of 183 days or more during the four (4) years immediately before the date of your application.

Consult How to get a police certificate (police check) for specific and up-to-date information on how to obtain police certificates from any country.

Note: If you are unable to obtain a police certificate from any country, provide an explanation in the space provided in question 6 M on the application form.

Format: Original.

 

[itsmyid]

specifically asked and confirmed it is about the Police Certificate.

Another thing to add about the reason why 4-year requirement wouldn't be unreasonable:
let's say someone accumulated 1095 days over the course of the last 5 years, but spent over 183 days in country A 3 years ago and committed some crime or even stayed in jail in that country, not requiring police certificate would let him get citizenship with no issue, is that really what we want?

 

[HamiltonApplicant]

no, specifically asked and confirmed it is about the Police Certificate. Even give him my example.

Rule is stupid if you ask me, No one needs 183 days to commit a serious crime! But rules are rules...

 

[dpenabill]

specifically asked and confirmed it is about the Police Certificate.

What is about the Police Certificate?

We know that the Bill C-6 changes do NOT affect the prohibitions time period. That is four years. That continues to be four years.

Again, IRCC can change the criteria for who must submit a police certificate any time (the police certificate requirement is not dictated by statute or regulation). It is possible they will do so at the same time they roll out the changes in implementing new rules per Bill C-6. But if they do this, it still has NOTHING to do with the subject being discussed, which are changes due to implementation of Bill C-6.

Moreover, to be clear: any convictions abroad during the previous FOUR years will continue to be a prohibition. That for sure is not changing (unless further changes to the Citizenship Act are tabled and adopted in the future). The purpose of the police certificate is to show the applicant has not had any criminal convictions abroad that would constitute a prohibition . . . which, again, depends on a clean record for FOUR years, which again is not something which is changing.

And because of the latter (regarding which there is no doubt), it would be a big surprise if IRCC modifies the application to change the criteria for who needs to submit a police certificate . . . so my guess is that the call centre representative was wrong or misunderstood the question . . . the likelihood of which is high given the probability that the call centre representatives have not yet seen the new form or new instructions, but rather are working off a FAQ script which is focused on what changes are being made pursuant to Bill C-6.

 

[dpenabill]

Another thing to add about the reason why 4-year requirement wouldn't be unreasonable:
let's say someone accumulated 1095 days over the course of the last 5 years, but spent over 183 days in country A 3 years ago and committed some crime or even stayed in jail in that country, not requiring police certificate would let him get citizenship with no issue, is that really what we want?

To be clear, all applicants must affirm the absence of any prohibition. There are no changes to the time period covered by the prohibitions. This is and remains four years. Any conviction (for what would be an indictable offence if committed in Canada) abroad within the preceding four years means the person is prohibited from a grant of citizenship. Not eligible. And there is no way that IRCC is going to drop the prohibitions item from the application.

So a person with a conviction within the preceding four years will not be eligible. If that person fails to disclose this, that is a material misrepresentation. This is precisely the kind of misrepresentation which has historically (in addition to war crimes) been the target if not focus on revocation proceedings. (Noting though that prior to Bill C-24, there was no citizenship prohibition for a PR's foreign convictions.)


Moreover, the prohibition is not triggered by 183 days in other country:

The prohibition is triggered by a conviction in another country during the preceding four years. Even if the PR was merely transiting another country, committed an offence, and was convicted there within the preceding four years, the PR must disclose this in the application. A failure to do so is a misrepresentation. No minimum amount of time in that other country is necessary to trigger the prohibition.

Again, the 183 days within four years criteria, for triggering who needs to include a police certificate with the application, is ADMINISTRATIVE, not dictated by statute or regulation. IRCC can change this criteria (as long as it is reasonable) anytime. IRCC could require anyone who spent 30 days in another country to submit a police certificate. Or increase the triggering number to 200 or 300 days. Or drop it altogether.

And regardless whether or not an applicant needs to submit a police certificate, a conviction during the preceding four years will still constitute a prohibition.

 

[itsmyid]

To be clear, all applicants must affirm the absence of any prohibition. There are no changes to the time period covered by the prohibitions. This is and remains four years. Any conviction (for what would be an indictable offence if committed in Canada) abroad within the preceding four years means the person is prohibited from a grant of citizenship. Not eligible. And there is no way that IRCC is going to drop the prohibitions item from the application.

So a person with a conviction within the preceding four years will not be eligible. If that person fails to disclose this, that is a material misrepresentation. This is precisely the kind of misrepresentation which has historically (in addition to war crimes) been the target if not focus on revocation proceedings. (Noting though that prior to Bill C-24, there was no citizenship prohibition for a PR's foreign convictions.)


Moreover, the prohibition is not triggered by 183 days in other country:

The prohibition is triggered by a conviction in another country during the preceding four years. Even if the PR was merely transiting another country, committed an offence, and was convicted there within the preceding four years, the PR must disclose this in the application. A failure to do so is a misrepresentation. No minimum amount of time in that other country is necessary to trigger the prohibition.

Again, the 183 days within four years criteria, for triggering who needs to include a police certificate with the application, is ADMINISTRATIVE, not dictated by statute or regulation. IRCC can change this criteria (as long as it is reasonable) anytime. IRCC could require anyone who spent 30 days in another country to submit a police certificate. Or increase the triggering number to 200 or 300 days. Or drop it altogether.

And regardless whether or not an applicant needs to submit a police certificate, a conviction during the preceding four years will still constitute a prohibition.

well, disclosing is voluntary and people can (and most have tried) to withhold that information , but police certificate is mandatory and it would be hard to get away without it

 

[dpenabill]

well, disclosing is voluntary and people can (and most have tried) to withhold that information , but police certificate is mandatory and it would be hard to get away without it

Actually it is the opposite. The prohibitions are statutory. The applicant MUST disclose this information (and otherwise it is a misrepresentation, and precisely the kind of misrepresentation for which there is actually a risk of later having citizenship revoked).

There is no statutory or regulatory requirement to submit a police certificate. It is entirely at IRCC's discretion who is asked to submit a police certificate with the application, or submit an explanation why not. The latter will pass the completeness screening as much as including one. Indeed, even applicants who check "no" that they have not been in another country 183 or more days in the preceding four years, and do not include a police certificate, but whose presence calculation reveals they in fact had been, pass the completeness screening (or at least in the past they have) and are only later asked to provide a police certificate (reported instances occurring at the interview). But IRCC can ask any applicant to submit a police certificate, even if the applicant was only briefly in the other country.

Note, there are specific regulations which do prescribe, in detail, certain things which must be included in the application in order for it to qualify as an application for citizenship. Last I looked, there was NO such requirement for a police certificate. Not mandatory. It is merely an administrative decision by IRCC to demand one.

 

[screech339]

I don't see any reason for CIC to keep past 4 years for police clearance when the minimum will be 3 years to qualify. It made sense under 4/6 rule since 4 years is the minimum.

As mentioned by others, just wait next week to confirm.