Just a curious question.
What if the applicant says that I have destroyed the old passport? Or says the embassy has destroyed it or never returned it to me? As far as the interview is concerned, shouldnt the applicant be safe?
What do you mean by "safe?"
While the significance of passport stamps has declined dramatically in the last decade, especially the last few years, it appears that IRCC still considers all possibly used passports as important evidence to examine in processing citizenship applications. The burden of proof is on the applicant. And, of course, there is an increased risk of elevated scrutiny if an applicant fails to provide all the important evidence.
Little raises concerns more than missing evidence.
The significance, the significance a relevant passport is absent has, varies considerably. It may be of very little significance. It may be of much import to IRCC.
It depends. Ultimately, an applicant with solid proof of his or her qualifications for citizenship is "safe" in the sense that he or she should ultimately take the oath of citizenship . . .
however long that might take. Otherwise, to what extent the process is delayed due to non-routine processing, if at all, can vary considerably depending on factors like how much of the applicant's eligibility period the passport could have been used, how strong the applicant's case is otherwise, how IRCC perceives the applicant's credibility, among many other factors.