Does one need a translation of passport stamps for the interview?

[Together]

I've heard a lot that this is needed, but I think this was based on C-24 rules. I cannot find anywhere in current rules or in the letters from CIC after C-6 came into force that one has to bring the translations of stamps along with passports for the interview. So, my questions:
1. Do you have a current reference for this?
2. If the translation is required, then is there a need to translate everything not in English/French or only those that are not in Latin alphabet? In many countries, the stamp has only name of the port of entry (in Latin letters) and date. So, there is nothing to translate if fact. Although strictly speaking, the stamp is not in English/French.
3. Often, the stamps and visas have information duplicated in local language (say, Arabic) and in English. Is there a need to translate non-English part or it is going to be clear that English text on the stamp is an actual translation?
4. Do they need a translation of all stamps and visas in all passports or only the stamps during eligibilty period (e.g. last 5 years)?

 

[Seym]

This has nothing to do with C6 or C24. While I'm not sure it's explicitely specified for stamps, it's crearly written in the citizenship application requirement that every document sent to IRCC which is ot in french or english must be translated. Also applies to the documents given to citizenship agents during the interview.

Only translate stamps/visas that an average english/french speaking person would not understand. Everything written in 2 languages is fine. And obviously "Berlin 12 Mar 2017" doesn't need a translation

Also, any old stamp in the passports you had during the eligibility period should be translated if not in french/english. IRCC agent has no way to understand that a stamp in arabic is 7 years old if your passport expired 3 years ago.

It may be completely useless (during my interview, the citizenship agent barely glanced at my passports and didn't look at the stamps) but it also MAY be useful. If you don't mind the potential delay (DM 24/48h after the test vs DM 24/48h after the translation is sent, basically), you can take a chance. If you want DM asap, well...

 

[Together]

This has nothing to do with C6 or C24.

The requirement to have stamps translated was in the rules for C-24 (and for RQ).

 

[Seym]

The requirement to have stamps translated was in the rules for C-24 (and for RQ).

Stamp translation if required by IRCC agent predates C24...

 

[Hey]

So do you think guys we transilate just in case of request, and do not look what is the cost behind??!!

I’m hesitant though !!!please advise my pals !!!

Thanks!!

 

[qorax]

So do you think guys we transilate just in case of request, and do not look what is the cost behind??!!

I’m hesitant though !!!please advise my pals !!!

Thanks!!

Immigration stamps do not need to be translated unless specifically asked.

 

[dpenabill]

I cannot find anywhere in current rules or in the letters from CIC after C-6 came into force that one has to bring the translations of stamps along with passports for the interview.

Not sure why so many think stamps in a language not in one of the official languages do not fall under the explicitly stated requirement, in the citizenship application instruction guide, to have a properly authenticated translation for ALL (noting that "all" usually means ALL) documents not in one of the official languages.

This is not just a requirement for citizenship applicants. It is a general requirement for any documents presented to IRCC. But it is explicitly stated in the Instruction Guide. And this has been the rule since long before Harper was PM, let alone before Bill C-24.

The rule is explicitly stated. Just read the instruction guide. Most times the notice for the interview also states that proper translations are required.

So do you think guys we transilate just in case of request, and do not look what is the cost behind?

Just in case? Again, the rule is to present a proper translation. It is clearly stated. A statement as to this REQUIREMENT (not a mere request) is usually included with the notice of the interview.

As discussed in depth elsewhere, yes, there are many reports that IRCC may be lenient or lax in the way it handles passports relative to this requirement. That is because IRCC is not out to enforce technical requirements just because they are a requirement. If IRCC is satisfied with the applicant's passport and accounting of travel history, many have reported that IRCC does not insist on the applicant having a translation. This was my personal experience as well.

But again the rule is clear. The rule is to provide a proper translation of any information presented which is not in one of the official languages.

 

[Hey]

Not sure why so many think stamps in a language not in one of the official languages do not fall under the explicitly stated requirement, in the citizenship application instruction guide, to have a properly authenticated translation for ALL (noting that "all" usually means ALL) documents not in one of the official languages.

This is not just a requirement for citizenship applicants. It is a general requirement for any documents presented to IRCC. But it is explicitly stated in the Instruction Guide. And this has been the rule since long before Harper was PM, let alone before Bill C-24.

The rule is explicitly stated. Just read the instruction guide. Most times the notice for the interview also states that proper translations are required.



Just in case? Again, the rule is to present a proper translation. It is clearly stated. A statement as to this REQUIREMENT (not a mere request) is usually included with the notice of the interview.

As discussed in depth elsewhere, yes, there are many reports that IRCC may be lenient or lax in the way it handles passports relative to this requirement. That is because IRCC is not out to enforce technical requirements just because they are a requirement. If IRCC is satisfied with the applicant's passport and accounting of travel history, many have reported that IRCC does not insist on the applicant having a translation. This was my personal experience as well.

But again the rule is clear. The rule is to provide a proper translation of any information presented which is not in one of the official languages.

I 100% agree with you, but in invitation they asked
“Please bring with you all passport for the copies you sent with the appplication, this is one thing
Second, they asked BIO page only, so they still do not know what is inside the passport until the interview is held
To me I do not mind to pay the translation fees as headache free insurance ,

 

[dpenabill]

I

. . . but in invitation they asked
“Please bring with you all passport for the copies you sent with the appplication, this is one thing
Second, they asked BIO page only, so they still do not know what is inside the passport until the interview is held

Again, the rule, the requirement, is clear. A proper translation is required for any document containing information which is not in one of the official languages. That is the rule. That is the requirement.

I would be surprised if the notice for the test and interview did not contain an instruction to provide a translation for documents not in one of the official languages. The fact this does not specifically reference passport stamps is not relevant. A passport is a document.

Again, IRCC does NOT always strictly enforce this. There are many anecdotal reports of applicants without translations not encountering any issues. And, indeed, I personally went to my interview without a translation even though there was some information in a couple passport stamps that was not in one of the official languages. No problem. Not mentioned. Not asked about it.

Such reports, however, do not change what the rule is. The rule is to accompany a document with a proper translation of any information which is not in one of the official languages. Rather simple.

The usual consequence, the only penalty of sorts, for failing to follow the instructions, for failing to bring a translation (for an applicant with passport stamps containing information not in one of the official languages) is generally being instructed specifically to provide a translation. To what extent this delays being scheduled for the oath will vary, in part depending on how long it takes the applicant to provide and submit a proper translation, but also in part depending on whether this knocks the applicant out a queue for an upcoming oath to wait to be placed in another queue later, perhaps significantly later.

Who is compelled to provide a translation, versus who is not, almost certainly depends in part on how easy it is for the processing agent to be satisfied without a translation. This can be influenced by the nature and quantity of stamps not in English or French, by how easily the stamps are interpreted without a translation (which in turn can depend on the language or alphabet of the language involved), by how satisfied IRCC is with the applicant's accounting of travel history.

No rocket science necessary to plot the trajectory if IRCC has questions or concerns about the applicant's travel history AND the applicant fails to have a translation for stamps not in English or French. Not complicated. Some common sense helps.

In the meantime the rule is what it is. Passports are documents. Documents containing information which is not in one of the official languages require a translation. Unless IRCC does not enforce the requirement. Many times IRCC does not enforce the requirement. Many times it does.

 

[Hey]

I


Again, the rule, the requirement, is clear. A proper translation is required for any document containing information which is not in one of the official languages. That is the rule. That is the requirement.

I would be surprised if the notice for the test and interview did not contain an instruction to provide a translation for documents not in one of the official languages. The fact this does not specifically reference passport stamps is not relevant. A passport is a document.

Again, IRCC does NOT always strictly enforce this. There are many anecdotal reports of applicants without translations not encountering any issues. And, indeed, I personally went to my interview without a translation even though there was some information in a couple passport stamps that was not in one of the official languages. No problem. Not mentioned. Not asked about it.

Such reports, however, do not change what the rule is. The rule is to accompany a document with a proper translation of any information which is not in one of the official languages. Rather simple.

The usual consequence, the only penalty of sorts, for failing to follow the instructions, for failing to bring a translation (for an applicant with passport stamps containing information not in one of the official languages) is generally being instructed specifically to provide a translation. To what extent this delays being scheduled for the oath will vary, in part depending on how long it takes the applicant to provide and submit a proper translation, but also in part depending on whether this knocks the applicant out a queue for an upcoming oath to wait to be placed in another queue later, perhaps significantly later.

Who is compelled to provide a translation, versus who is not, almost certainly depends in part on how easy it is for the processing agent to be satisfied without a translation. This can be influenced by the nature and quantity of stamps not in English or French, by how easily the stamps are interpreted without a translation (which in turn can depend on the language or alphabet of the language involved), by how satisfied IRCC is with the applicant's accounting of travel history.

No rocket science necessary to plot the trajectory if IRCC has questions or concerns about the applicant's travel history AND the applicant fails to have a translation for stamps not in English or French. Not complicated. Some common sense helps.

In the meantime the rule is what it is. Passports are documents. Documents containing information which is not in one of the official languages require a translation. Unless IRCC does not enforce the requirement. Many times IRCC does not enforce the requirement. Many times it does.

but do we need to bring all passports or only the ones with application?
in the letter the stated "all passports and travel documents in your possession" that's exactly written not only the ones with application
because as you know with application we sent only passports within the last 5 years from date of the application

that's not clear though

 

[xxpazaway]

in my case, I have atleast 6 stamps that is not in English or French, two of them had it after I sent my application. I have not received any request from IRCC of passport stamp translation, but I got it certified on my own discretion so whenever they ask its ready. I see people who were asked for translation, I just want to be in the safe side.

 

[dpenabill]

but do we need to bring all passports or only the ones with application?
in the letter the stated "all passports and travel documents in your possession" that's exactly written not only the ones with application
because as you know with application we sent only passports within the last 5 years from date of the application

that's not clear though

Relevant passports. Any passport which was valid or otherwise usable during the eligibility period. And any new passport obtained after applying. Basically same as submitted (bio-pages) with the application plus any new ones . . . assuming the applicant sent all relevant passports with the application.

 

[dpenabill]

I have not received any request from IRCC of passport stamp translation

You are, however, instructed to bring a translation to the interview. That is, applicants are instructed to provide a translation for any document not in one of the official languages. Passports are documents. Therefore, the instructions (guide and usually instructions sent with notice of interview) clearly state that if your passport contains information which is not in one of the official languages, you are instructed to have a proper translation.

Again, this is not uniformly enforced. The fact it is not always enforced does not mean it is not required.

Way too many seem to think that because they drive 125 km/hour regularly on the 401 without getting a ticket somehow that means the speed limit is not 100km/hour for them. Speed limit is still 100 km/hour no matter how many times or how many drivers are not ticketed for going faster.

 

[xxpazaway]

You are, however, instructed to bring a translation to the interview. That is, applicants are instructed to provide a translation for any document not in one of the official languages. Passports are documents. Therefore, the instructions (guide and usually instructions sent with notice of interview) clearly state that if your passport contains information which is not in one of the official languages, you are instructed to have a proper translation.

Again, this is not uniformly enforced. The fact it is not always enforced does not mean it is not required.

Way too many seem to think that because they drive 125 km/hour regularly on the 401 without getting a ticket somehow that means the speed limit is not 100km/hour for them. Speed limit is still 100 km/hour no matter how many times or how many drivers are not ticketed for going faster.

Thanks a lot. I will bring it with me on my test/interview.

 

[xxpazaway]

I am very happy in this forum as it helps me from my PR application which is a little bit complicated and now my citizenship application. Thanks to all who has unconditional support and or advice to anyone who are in need. I deeply appreciate it. HAPPY FAMILY DAY Everyone. ENJOY