Who conducts prohibitions checks:
like criminality is done by RCMP: Security by spy agency...
Senior member please.
like criminality is done by RCMP: Security by spy agency...
Senior member please.
October 11th 2017 - Citizenship Applicants under 3/5 rule
- Thread starter HamiltonApplicant
- Start date
Screening for potential prohibitions is not a solitary task and occurs at multiple steps in the process.
First, and foremost, the applicant is required to respond to whether certain situations apply, in item 16 in the current application, which are related to whether or not the applicant might be subject to a prohibition. These are broad enough that if there is any applicable prohibition, the applicant MUST disclose the relevant circumstances. That is, the person who conducts the primary check for prohibitions is the applicant himself or herself.
And note: failure to get this one right is perhaps the most likely and common ground for alleging misrepresentation. That could be during processing when a finding of misrepresentation would result in denying the application, a further five-year prohibition, and potential criminal charges. OR it could be after taking the oath, which would grounds for revoking citizenship, a further ten-year prohibition, and potential criminal charges. In the last decade or so, and looking forward, this is perhaps targeted almost as commonly as residency/presence fraud. It is the most likely to be discovered and prosecuted misrepresentation because there is typically a judicial record or other official proceeding record which documents the misrepresentation.
Secondly, and importantly, the applicant is almost always asked about these same circumstances again, and required to sign an affirmation of his or her declarations regarding, during an interview. Same potential consequences loom. I am not sure of current local office practices, but at least some applicants are asked about this again and again required to sign a written affirmation of no prohibitions, at the time they appear for the oath ceremony.
Additionally, applicants who have been in some other country for 183 or more days during the four years prior to applying are required to submit a police certificate, to in effect prove they have no prohibitions arising from criminal charges in that country. Applicants may otherwise also be required to submit a police certificate later in the processing of their application.
Then, as you note, RCMP does a criminal history background check. This is undoubtedly more extensive and thorough than a name-record check.
IRCC also periodically does a GCMS record check, which would flag an applicant if there is a FOSS alert potentially related to certain prohibitions (reported PR RO breach for example) and would usually flag the applicant if there is a criminal name-record hit (at least in Canada or the U.S.). This check is supposed to be done any time any action is taken on the application, so it is at least done two or three times during the processing of the application, last time not too long before the oath is scheduled, a final clearance one might say.
Then, as you note, CSIS (which has functions well beyond the scope of a "spy" agency) also does some background checking, largely focused on whether there are any security related issues or prohibitions. The scope of this is not known, but obviously for some it can be very extensive and involve referrals to authorities in other countries.
Along the way, if IRCC comes across any information suggesting there is a possibility of a prohibition, particularly any undeclared prohibition, it can refer inquiries or even official investigations to either CBSA or the RCMP. These referrals may have to be supported by particular grounds, but those grounds do not have to rise to the level that would support a search or seizure warrant for example.
And I am undoubtedly omitting some.
If you are going back to the patio you will have to change you’re oath day because they take you’re PR card so if you go out you won’t be able to re enter canada
Had the test yesterday, 19/20. The interviewer took a look at the stamps in my passport (nothing within eligibility period other than flagpoling when I got PR), said they had no questions and that everything looked good. Status changed to decision made on March 29test invite Letter feb 28 and test date March 28
aries9811
Hero Member
- Jun 6, 2009
- 8
- Category........
- Visa Office......
- Buffalo-NY
- NOC Code......
- ................
- Job Offer........
- Pre-Assessed..
- App. Filed.......
- Jan 27, 2010
- Doc's Request.
- March 17,2010 --> Documents Recieved @VO April 2,2010
- Nomination.....
- Not Applicable
- AOR Received.
- Second AOR 1st May 2010
- IELTS Request
- March 17,2010
- File Transfer...
- Nov 2, 2011
- Med's Request
- Jan 26,2012
- Med's Done....
- Received @Ottawa Feb 17,2012
- Interview........
- Waived
- Passport Req..
- May 10, 2012
- VISA ISSUED...
- June 2012
- LANDED..........
- August 2012
Hello good people ... Could I ask a favor please.
There is a movement being orchestrated by the Iranians (both PR and Citizenship applicants) who feel that they are being systematically discriminated against because of their nationality.
They cannot prove this because CSIS and IRCC won't release the information (even aggregated general stats on lapsed time for Security Screening).
Would it be possible for us to help them develop some statistical backing for their claim, by indicating our nationality in the spreadsheet?
Of course, this voluntary and only those who are comfortable should do that.
Thanks
Jeff
There is a movement being orchestrated by the Iranians (both PR and Citizenship applicants) who feel that they are being systematically discriminated against because of their nationality.
They cannot prove this because CSIS and IRCC won't release the information (even aggregated general stats on lapsed time for Security Screening).
Would it be possible for us to help them develop some statistical backing for their claim, by indicating our nationality in the spreadsheet?
Of course, this voluntary and only those who are comfortable should do that.
Thanks
Jeff
Anyone is free to ask but I believe this is irrelavent question. We are just tracking amd helping with issues. IRCC clearly wrote in their guide they only check eligibility of citizenship based on information they received from CBSA RCMP CRA etc. If we havent did anything that makes us ineligible to apply, clear test and attend Oath we are 100% safe here
Dude we are all equal under Canadian laws. It is possible that our background check is requested from Backhome and you may be aware about delay in those countries where we are from. Also note we all are just Canadians after we have our PR amd once we land here legally.
I know few relatives who send files in October and November even their status is Application received only. If you analyse SS you can know only 20% or less have received their Oath dates or completed it.
Dont think about past life and feel that they are dealing us seperately. It will be all good soon. Just crazy volume.
Rest you know how was the justice system where we born. It everything was good why we came here to live ...
I know few relatives who send files in October and November even their status is Application received only. If you analyse SS you can know only 20% or less have received their Oath dates or completed it.
Dont think about past life and feel that they are dealing us seperately. It will be all good soon. Just crazy volume.
Rest you know how was the justice system where we born. It everything was good why we came here to live ...
This will certainly shine a light on the issue. I personally have no problem with adding my nationality to the spreadsheet.
Pls be consider we are living in Canada not anywhere else.... If they want to treat everyone differently why they invite tons of refusee and other people who are not safe in their home
Yeah Canada is a great country no doubt about that. But by no means, one can claim there is no discrimination in this country. Also, I didn't say the claim is true or false. In contrary I supported Jeff.torbain's suggestion to see if the claim is valid or not.