Any other 2011 applicants here?

[qorax]

@Lily2011: Here's wishing you all the very best ma'am! And pray the ailing family member recovers fully.

@dpenabill: Love you man. Brohugs!

 

[Lily2011]

To be clear, my post was not in response to you but was addressed to those who had questions or concerns about how it is that a citizenship application could be in process so long. I quoted your posts for reference. (This is why I included them at the end of my post, not to address them but for reference.)

My effort was to explain that there are reasons why the process has taken so long, that your situation is indeed unusual, tied to the particular facts in your case, and thus it does NOT indicate that IRCC arbitrarily or capriciously fails to process citizenship applications. I made a concerted effort to reference facts not judgmental characterizations.

Regarding the facts:

There is no appeal of a 44(1) Report for a breach of the PR RO UNLESS the report resulted in the issuance of a Departure or Removal Order (both are the same thing just different name). While the Report is the subject of the appeal, the decision being appealed is that made by the Minister's Delegate, which is a Departure or Removal Order. (The other path to an appeal is to appeal a denied PR TD application.) Obviously the Report was valid in law (otherwise the outcome of the appeal would not have been based on H&C reasons).

If were not abroad for an extended period, between the date you were reported in 2014 and the date of your appeal hearing in June 2017, during that two and a half plus years (up to three and a half years), you would easily be in compliance with the PR RO now, rather than "couple months short" (or, "still a few months short").

Being RQ'd AND being reported and being RQ'd a second time, is what it is. At minimum it is an explanation for why a 2011 citizenship application might still be unresolved as of February 2018.

As I noted, perhaps the second RQ was arbitrary, but it is more likely it was based on legitimate criteria (just because there is a reason to impose RQ does not dictate whether the applicant is qualified or not qualified; it is a reason to examine more thoroughly). As I noted, perhaps CIC's initial delay in processing your application was deliberately intended to wait until you were absent long enough to not be in compliance with the PR RO, but obviously you were abroad after applying for an extended period of time given a valid in law 44(1) Report in 2014 (and it was widely known at the time that extended absences after applying were subject to such delays and elevated scrutiny; probably still this way even if not so much as it was in the Harper-era). Thus, overall it appears there was cause for CIC and then IRCC to engage in elevated scrutiny of your application, and in general this is not a situation tending to indict IRCC for arbitrarily or capriciously stalling.

I do NOT mean to judge. I did not say you have abused the system. As I noted, the outcome of the citizenship application will depend on its merits.

If, however, there has been any mis-characterization of abuse, that would be in the implicit suggestion that IRCC allows citizenship applications to wallow in limbo without cause for seven years. That is not the situation (not that it has not happened to others; just that it is NOT the situation here). And other members of the forum are entitled to some context.

Note: The fact that the appeal was granted based on H&C reasons is actually a positive factor for you; while it does not entirely start the PR RO clock over again, it should mean you are NOT strictly bound to a PR RO calculation based on 2/5 presence for at least awhile. Meaning a return to Canada relatively soon will have good odds of going OK (unless IRCC has you flagged otherwise). But further extended absences will of course increase the risk of being reported, subject to the strength of your H&C reasons. As you may be aware, typically there is more risk in a PR TD application than in being reported at the Port-of-Entry upon arrival.

By the way, changes to the Citizenship Act now mean that if you are reported again and the Minister's Delegate upholds the report, that could be grounds to deny the citizenship application rather than merely suspending processing of the application. The application is not saved from being denied because of or pending an appeal of the Report.

Thanks again for your input.

What do you mean "Unless IRCC have you flagged otherwise"? flagged for what reason? could you give examples? (illegal stuff, warrants, immigration issues, etc)

 

[dpenabill]

What do you mean "Unless IRCC have you flagged otherwise"? flagged for what reason? could you give examples? (illegal stuff, warrants, immigration issues, etc)

Sure, what you refer to in the parenthetical are things which would likely cause you to be flagged in FOSS/GCMS.

I added the "unless IRCC has you flagged" caveat because there is no guarantee that the length of your most recent absence will not trigger a PR RO examination or investigation upon your next arrival in Canada. The fact you were allowed to retain PR status as of the decision in June 2017, based on H&C reasons, is a big factor tending to be in your favour. It seems likely you will be OK upon your next arrival (noting, however, sooner is better). BUT the H&C decision does not conclusively or definitively start the clock over again.

Either the PR card application or your citizenship application (or something else we in the public might not be aware of) could result in a flag in your FOSS/GCMS, alerting CBSA officers to watch for this or that. Awareness of this possibility derives almost exclusively from correlating anecdotal reports over the years, since CIC, IRCC, and CBSA do not disclose to the public any of these policies, practices, or methods. As best we can discern, for example, it appears that when IRCC perceives that a PR is abroad while a PR card application is pending, there is an increased risk the PR will be referred to Secondary upon arrival at a Port-of-Entry and examined more extensively than most PRs returning to Canada. Not that this happens for every PR who goes abroad while they have a PR card application in process. Just appears (based on correlating anecdotal reports and background information) that those who are abroad for an extended time, long enough to indicate residing abroad, have a higher risk.

There is a lot we do not know about what happens behind the curtains at CBSA and IRCC. More than a few of us, in the public, advocate for more transparency. Some of us have, over the years, followed certain issues more closely in order to at least illuminate (as best we can) some of the elements and factors which can have a big impact on how things go. This is not to facilitate gaming the system, or abusing the system. BUT Canadians (and PRs are Canadians) should be entitled to know what the rules of the game are and how they are applied, so they can make important life decisions accordingly, with due consideration for what their personal circumstances and priorities are.

On the other hand, perhaps as importantly, and to the extent warranted, those applying for citizenship should also be assured (with some isolated exceptions, unfortunately) that generally IRCC will process their applications in due course, without prejudice, based on the facts and law, pursuant to fair procedures . . . that is, the vast, vast majority of applicants do not need to worry that IRCC will capriciously put their application on a shelf and leave it there for many years.

Which leads back to our efforts to identify what can cause a citizenship application to go off the rails, so that applicants and prospective applicants are better aware of the pitfalls and, to the extent possible, better manage their risks and, if and when there is a bump in the road, better navigate the process.

So reports like yours are important. They help illuminate more of the picture. They help put some factors into perspective (especially when we have many other anecdotal reports to better establish context). This helps the forum help others.

 

[ChippyBoy]

This post/discussion is a salutary reminder to every citizenship applicant that, be the Law & official regulations what they may, one's citizenship application can "go off the rails" (as the esteemed dpenabill puts it) if the IRCC officer processing one's file decides, for her/his own professional reasons (e.g., suspicions or 'gut feeling' sense) to treat that particular file with such a degree of subjectivity, that the effect of such is to tick-down-the-clock towards nullifying the applicant's PR if s/he's moved abroad after having applied for Canadian citizenship.

 

[h3a3j6]

Sure, what you refer to in the parenthetical are things which would likely cause you to be flagged in FOSS/GCMS.

There is a lot we do not know about what happens behind the curtains at CBSA and IRCC. More than a few of us, in the public, advocate for more transparency. Some of us have, over the years, followed certain issues more closely in order to at least illuminate (as best we can) some of the elements and factors which can have a big impact on how things go. This is not to facilitate gaming the system, or abusing the system. BUT Canadians (and PRs are Canadians) should be entitled to know what the rules of the game are and how they are applied, so they can make important life decisions accordingly, with due consideration for what their personal circumstances and priorities are.

On the other hand, perhaps as importantly, and to the extent warranted, those applying for citizenship should also be assured (with some isolated exceptions, unfortunately) that generally IRCC will process their applications in due course, without prejudice, based on the facts and law, pursuant to fair procedures . . . that is, the vast, vast majority of applicants do not need to worry that IRCC will capriciously put their application on a shelf and leave it there for many years.

Which leads back to our efforts to identify what can cause a citizenship application to go off the rails, so that applicants and prospective applicants are better aware of the pitfalls and, to the extent possible, better manage their risks and, if and when there is a bump in the road, better navigate the process.

@dpenabill, couldn't put it "on paper" any better than that. I firmly believe that the IRCC/CIC MO has a lot of wiggle room to allow for unprofessional behaviour by some employees. I also am a firm believer that public institutions need to be operated like businesses, with decent metrics/checks/balance because we (i.e. the tax payers) are ultimately footing the bill. Look at the Phoenix pay system for example. Another massive fluke leaking tax dollars (and I'm not debating politics here). No one was blamed for this gigantic waste of our dollars and no one ever will.

 

[FloydCan]

Seems to be a complicated case, no wonder it took so long.

 

[Lily2011]

Seems to be a complicated case, no wonder it took so long.

I wont deny that it is. But according to the agent (when I inquired about the delay in 2015 when I took the test), She said there was a delay from 2011 until 2014 because of one of the signatures looked strange and needed to be verified. So I wont blame it all on my complicated case. Others have complicated cases and they either get denied or approved, not waiting unknowingly for so long. I'm leaning towards that they delayed on purpose to see if I can keep my status, and the signature is an excuse.