In the absence of passport stamps, is it safe to say IRCC definitely has no way to verify an applicant's exit dates and must solely rely on whatever dates the applicant declares in the presence calculation form?
Short answer is NO, emphatically NO.
This query, however, warrants a full explanation about why.
The query here is one of those which alludes to some misunderstanding about the process, in large part rooted in underestimating how important the burden of proof is in the decision-making. The burden of proof is on the applicant. In the vast majority of cases, the information in the application suffices, IRCC is satisfied and citizenship is
routinely granted. In these cases, IRCC does, indeed,
in effect rely on the applicant's declared dates of travel, and in effect infers the applicant was present in Canada between the last reported date of entry and the next reported date of exit.
IRCC has various ways of assessing, or
verifying this information. But this is focused on looking for, again in effect, anything which in some way raises a concern or question about the completeness and accuracy of the information submitted by the applicant (and this includes all information submitted by the applicant, not just the travel history).
If IRCC perceives any reason-to-question the applicant's residency or presence, IRCC can require the applicant to submit proof which will verify all the relevant information. IRCC does not attempt to verify the applicant's information once IRCC questions or doubts or has concerns about the applicant's information.
It is the applicants burden to verify the information.
If the applicant is subject to the non-routine process and is, thus, a
residency case or a
presence case, the burden of verification in on the applicant, and if the applicant falls short of meeting that burden, the burden of proving or verifying presence in Canada, IRCC will decline to grant citizenship. If this happens, the applicant gets a chance to prove his or her case to a Citizenship Judge.
It is not the CJ's job, nor IRCC's job, to determine how many days the applicant was present in Canada. It is their job to assess the completeness and accuracy of the applicant's claims about presence. And, if there is any question about the completeness or accuracy of what the applicant claims, it is then the applicant's job to
prove how many days the applicant was present. In particular, if the applicant fails to prove actual presence sufficient to establish qualification for the grant of citizenship, it
does not matter how many days the applicant was actually present, both IRCC and the CJ are REQUIRED, by law, to deny the grant of citizenship. That is what the burden of proof is about.
The Longer Explanation; the rest of the story, so to key:
walktheline said:
I have EU passport and often travel to EU, so there are no any entry stamps or entry information held by EU countries.
I also ordered my CBSA travel history asking for exit record and the report says exit is only tracked at land borders after 2013, so in my case they have none of my exit record.
Although airlines may have my departure record, from this official article news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=1085459, right now government have no way to collect such record before the new legislation is passed.
So am I safe to say IRCC definitely have no way to verify my exit dates and have to solely rely on whatever dates I put on the form?
No, it is not safe to think that IRCC has no way to verify exit dates. No, absolutely, IRCC does not have to solely rely on whatever dates you enter into the form.
The burden of proof is on the applicant. For the vast majority of applicants, the result of IRCC's assessment of all the information and factors and history tends to verify the information submitted by the applicant, and IRCC will infer that the applicant was in Canada between last reported date of entry and the next date of exit.
BUT IRCC is not bound or required to make such an inference.
Many, many things can trigger IRCC's concerns about the completeness and accuracy of the applicant's travel history. Something odd about the applicant's telephone number or residential address. The appearance of what appears to be handwriting from more than one person in the application. An incongruity identified in the identification submitted. Information IRCC finds online, such as in a LinkedIn account. An apparent inconsistency with reported employment history and the applicant's lifestyle. And many, many other things.
Once IRCC has a concern about the completeness or accuracy of reported travel dates, the process tends to go into the RQ or
residency case non-routine process, and IRCC then tends to be more thorough and sometimes skeptical in its assessment of the applicant's submissions.
Once issued RQ, for example, the applicant needs to directly document actual
residency in Canada, and in large part do so for each and every month the applicant claimed to be in Canada, regardless of the reported and documented dates of exit and entry. Even though the qualifying requirement is physical presence, strong evidence of residency tends to corroborate presence, and the absence of proof of residency for a given month tends to suggest the applicant may have been outside Canada that month.
For any time period IRCC perceives the applicant
may have been outside Canada, IRCC is likely to require stronger proof of residence and presence for that time period. Again, this is despite reported travel dates.
So, no, it is not safe to think that IRCC has no way to verify exit dates. So, no, absolutely, IRCC does not have to solely rely on whatever dates you enter into the form.
The only safe way to approach reporting travel history is to be sure to completely and accurately report each and every date of exit (even day trips) and entry. Period.
An observation about the decision-making approach generally:
Sure, many qualified and ultimately successful applicants make mistakes in the residency calculation (older applications) or presence calculation (applications since June 11, 2015), including omissions. Anything larger than a minimal discrepancy, however, is a definite trigger for elevated scrutiny and potential skepticism. Sure, this is dependent on IRCC identifying the discrepancy . . .
OR, identifying some other reason-to-question the applicant's residency or presence.
That is, the overriding difference, between those applicants for whom IRCC will essentially make a decision based on the applicant's accounting of days present in Canada, versus those applicants who are at high risk for facing non-routine processing and who, perhaps, will be challenged to more thoroughly and objectively prove days present, is whether or not IRCC perceives some other
reason-to-question the applicant's residency or presence. The criteria IRCC employs in screening applicants, for the purpose of identifying whether there is a
reason-to-question the applicant's residency or presence, is
confidential information, not public information. We know quite a bit about what that criteria likely is, but the last definitive information about this is now four years old (it was from an accidentally disclosed copy of the File Requirements Checklist in 2012), and it is relatively easy to discern certain types of facts or circumstances which still constitute a
reason-to-question the applicant's residency or presence, such as any obvious inconsistencies in the applicant's information (inconsistent residential address with location of place of employment; a FOSS note from a PoE event indicating a residential address or employment at odds with the address or work history declared in the application, or any possibility the applicant had or could have had a Travel Document which has not been disclosed and presented to IRCC, among many, many others).
If and when IRCC perceives a
reason-to-question the applicant's residency or presence, the applicant can be, and many have been, required to far more thoroughly document their presence in Canada.
So, again, no, it is not safe to think that IRCC has no way to verify exit dates. So, no, absolutely, IRCC does not have to solely rely on whatever dates you enter into the form.
The only safe way to approach reporting travel history is to be sure to completely and accurately report each and every date of exit (even day trips) and entry. Period.
