+1(514) 937-9445 or Toll-free (Canada & US) +1 (888) 947-9445

October 11th 2017 - Citizenship Applicants under 3/5 rule

cn2017

Star Member
Oct 27, 2017
108
48
I understand your frustration. The main reason for such delay is getting the background checks and clearences that take a lot longer for some nationalities, due to current circumstances. This information is mostly not included in the notes and the IRCC does not say so much about it due to their policies. Therefore, it creates confusion for some citizenship applicants whose case are still in process after 12 months.
They told me that my case is only waiting for clearence (14 months) and I should wait till it is done. So, don’t be nervous about it. They are doing their job in a timely manner. It is just a more lengthy process.


Thanks a lot for the information! My concern is that they did not even start my background check until after my many phone calls after the 12 months period, so basically my case was sitting for one year untouched. This issue unfortunately is happening to a lot of applicants which is disturbing. I think most people’s concern is not the length of the background check, applicants biggest issue is that some IRCC agents (not all) don’t do their job and when people call them to ask why things are not moving they give the most ridiculous and careless answers. So, two main issues here, one is some agents are slacking irresponsibly and the other is lack of transparency. That doesn’t mean that they should reveal their work process secrets or all the details, but when someone calls them to ask why their case has been in process for 18 months, it is very irresponsible of them to just say “everything is fine and your case is in process” then people start to think that if these agents can only say what we can see on eCAS then why are they even there? Why are they wasting taxpayers money to provide useless answers? Anyway, thanks for the info. I personally think that there are discriminations against some nationalities and this needs to be addressed. Here is why I don’t believe they are being truthful, 1- If the background check or clearance really takes longer for let’s say Iranian, then why don’t they just honestly and openly post that on their web site and say it so people are not confused. 2- I have seen several Iranian cases that went through the normal process time, so the conclusion is that it all depends on the agent handling the case. Some might be racist, some might be slow, not fit for the job, etc. Either way, this is an obvious case of discrimination and against human rights. Hope this doesn't happen again at this rate and they do their work in a timely manner.
 
Last edited:

sarafandee

Hero Member
Nov 18, 2014
259
133
Thanks a lot for the information! My concern is that they did not even start my background check until after my many phone calls after the 12 months period, so basically my case was sitting for one year untouched. This issue unfortunately is happening to a lot of applicants which is disturbing. I think most people’s concern is not the length of the background check, applicants biggest issue is that some IRCC agents (not all) don’t do their job and when people call them to ask why things are not moving they give the most ridiculous and careless answers. So, two main issues here, one is some agents are slacking irresponsibly and the other is lack of transparency. That doesn’t mean that they should reveal their work process secrets or all the details, but when someone calls them to ask why their case has been in process for 18 months, it is very irresponsible of them to just say “everything is fine and your case is in process” then people start to think that if these agents can only say what we can see on eCAS then why are they even there? Why are they wasting taxpayers money to provide useless answers? Anyway, thanks for the info. I personally think that there are discriminations against some nationalities and this needs to be addressed. Here is why I don’t believe they are being truthful, 1- If the background check or clearance really takes longer for let’s say Iranian, then why don’t they just honestly and openly post that on their web site and say it so people are not confused. 2- I have seen several Iranian cases that went through the normal process time, so the conclusion is that it all depends on the agent handling the case. Some might be racist, some might be slow, not fit for the job, etc. Either way, this is an obvious case of discrimination and against human rights. Hope this doesn't happen again at this rate and they do their work in a timely manner.

How complicated is a background/security check? Type a person's name into a computer and see if you get any results, voila!

It kills me each time I call IRCC and they inform me that my background check is pending more than 12 months now. However I won't let them ruin my Christmas vacation, I'll enjoy it and hope for a response after the holidays.

Good luck to everyone out there still waiting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cn2017

K001

Newbie
Nov 4, 2014
7
7
hello, it has been a while since i provided an update. I haven't checked the forum in a while so I am not sure if this information will be valuable at this point or not. Below is an update on my application:

Test date: May 23, 2018
Decision Made: May 24, 2018
Oath Letter: May 29, 2018
Oath Ceremony: July 13, 2018

Good luck to those who are still waiting!
 

dpenabill

VIP Member
Apr 2, 2010
6,432
3,176
Thanks a lot for the information! My concern is that they did not even start my background check until after my many phone calls after the 12 months period, so basically my case was sitting for one year untouched. This issue unfortunately is happening to a lot of applicants which is disturbing. I think most people’s concern is not the length of the background check, applicants biggest issue is that some IRCC agents (not all) don’t do their job and when people call them to ask why things are not moving they give the most ridiculous and careless answers. So, two main issues here, one is some agents are slacking irresponsibly and the other is lack of transparency. That doesn’t mean that they should reveal their work process secrets or all the details, but when someone calls them to ask why their case has been in process for 18 months, it is very irresponsible of them to just say “everything is fine and your case is in process” then people start to think that if these agents can only say what we can see on eCAS then why are they even there? Why are they wasting taxpayers money to provide useless answers? Anyway, thanks for the info. I personally think that there are discriminations against some nationalities and this needs to be addressed. Here is why I don’t believe they are being truthful, 1- If the background check or clearance really takes longer for let’s say Iranian, then why don’t they just honestly and openly post that on their web site and say it so people are not confused. 2- I have seen several Iranian cases that went through the normal process time, so the conclusion is that it all depends on the agent handling the case. Some might be racist, some might be slow, not fit for the job, etc. Either way, this is an obvious case of discrimination and against human rights. Hope this doesn't happen again at this rate and they do their work in a timely manner.

How complicated is a background/security check? Type a person's name into a computer and see if you get any results, voila!

It kills me each time I call IRCC and they inform me that my background check is pending more than 12 months now. However I won't let them ruin my Christmas vacation, I'll enjoy it and hope for a response after the holidays.

Good luck to everyone out there still waiting.
REMINDER: the overwhelming vast majority of time an application is "in process" it is simply WAITING in a QUEUE for an agent or officer to take the next step. So when an applicant telephones the Help Centre (with some exceptions, most being about a happenstance of timing) it is most likely (by a big, big margin) the application is NOT BEING WORKED ON at that time, but is sitting in a queue, sitting waiting for someone to actually work on it. The amount of time spent actually working on a given application by any given agent or officer is probably a matter of MINUTES, less than an hour (except for more difficult non-routine issues, like full blown RQ, in which event the Citizenship Officer might, just MIGHT, be spending an amount of time on the application which can be expressed in terms of hours and parts of an hour).

In the meantime, the term "background check" is descriptive and does NOT refer to any particular check or clearance. And thus it warrants another reminder: to some extent there is a background check done each and every time any agent or officer acts on the application. At the least this is, indeed, as simple as suggested by @sarafandee: "Type a person's name into a computer and see if you get any results, voila!" And, again, it is done every time an agent or officer acts on the file since they are required to do a GCMS check every time, and that check includes FOSS, and thus includes (again, at the least) a check for name-record hits in the RCMP criminal history data bases as well as in the U.S. FBI/NCIC database (as shared with Canadian authorities).

In addition to the GCMS check (which, again, is repeated throughout the process), there are two other formal CLEARANCES: the RCMP criminal and security clearance, and the CSIS security clearance. Neither of these are done by IRCC. They are done by the RCMP and CSIS respectively. These can involve far more than a name-record check into an electronic data base. The referral for these clearances is (probably still) made in the same task-step that opens the file in GCMS, that is at the same time the application is given AOR. Processing the application does NOT wait on receipt of these clearances. Details about this aspect of the process are strictly confidential, but enough is known to recognize these clearances are usually complete and entered into GCMS well by the time a processing agent opens the file in a local office. There are exceptions, of course, such that a few applicants are the subject of more extensive criminality or security checks. And yes, some are referred to Canadian authorities overseas for further inquiry (and these, in particular, tend to take a long time). BUT, for the vast majority of applicants the RCMP and CSIS clearances are done, no problem, no delay. Sometimes an update of the clearances is required, but here too the parameters for when an update is required are confidential.

There are different levels of access to GCMS records. I do not know for sure, but my sense is that Help Centre agents either have the same level of access as the individual applicant (such as what the applicant would receive in response to an ATIP request) or perhaps a just slightly higher level of access. This level of access reveals very little about either the RCMP or CSIS clearances, at most indicating complete but probably, usually, indicating an open field EVEN IF the clearance has actually been done and entered by the respective agency (RCMP or CSIS). Again, details at this level are largely confidential. But most indications suggest that even when the RCMP and CSIS have submitted their respective clearance, GCMS does NOT show these as completed UNLESS and UNTIL the appropriate official at IRCC has taken a particular step in processing. It is not clear whether this can be a processing agent preparing an assessment of the application to be referred to the responsible Citizenship Officer for a decision on the application, or whether this is something done by the Citizenship Officer.

IN ANY EVENT, it is very likely it is true that the application is waiting for the clearances to be "complete" until that processing step is done. So it is NOT a lie for the Help Centre agents to say the application is waiting for a background check to be completed. Even though the respective agency itself has in fact completed and filed the respective clearance.

In the meantime, the processing agent and/or Citizenship Officer also perform tasks on the application which fall under the ambit of what one would describe as a "background" check. For some applicants, for example, there is a more thorough screening of the applicant's employment or address history. I.E. background checking. Ranging from making telephone calls and researching open sources, such as researching information in internet accounts including LinkedIn, to doing GCMS checks on the identified employers (primarily to see if the named employer has been tagged or flagged in other immigration checks). Again, all this is probably done in a matter of minutes, not hours, though for some perhaps it involves an hour or more.


THUS, OVERALL:

It is quite likely that some Help Centre agents give a generic response to status inquiries, a response which is roughly some version of "waiting for background check (or clearance)," whether or not the application is in fact waiting for some particular clearance. This is probably, in part, just the fastest, easiest way to conclude the telephone call (so the Help Centre agent can get to another caller, one with a REAL question), and is employed (by the Help Centre agent) when it is readily apparent the application is simply IN QUEUE waiting for the next step to be done. There really is no other answer which would be any more useful or informative.

If my impression is correct, that is if my sense of this is correct, and based on a long-term pattern of anecdotal reports in conjunction with what is known about how the process works I do have quite a bit of confidence about this, it is a fairly typical Help Centre agent response to inquiries which are basically in the nature of "Are we there YET?" (And yes, this appropriately evokes an image of impatient children in the back seat of a car on a long trip. Sorry, but that is how it usually is.)

That is, when the Help Centre agent interprets the inquiry to really be "Are we there YET?" the agent is, in effect, simply replying "NO, your application is in QUEUE waiting for the next step."

And this is NOT a lie. The next step will always involve, at the least, another GCMS background check. And that must be done before the next action is taken, be that earlier in the process when the next step is scheduling a test and interview, or at the end phase of the process when a Citizenship Officer makes the final decision to grant citizenship and schedule the applicant for an oath ceremony.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NB61

jameswood2

Star Member
Jul 11, 2018
157
22
I don't get it how long does it take to background check someone 10 years? after you gave a residency to that person it takes you 14months to do a background check? let's say that person is criminal, it takes you 14months to realize that??? this is just bs to me
 
  • Like
Reactions: cn2017

sarafandee

Hero Member
Nov 18, 2014
259
133
REMINDER: the overwhelming vast majority of time an application is "in process" it is simply WAITING in a QUEUE for an agent or officer to take the next step. So when an applicant telephones the Help Centre (with some exceptions, most being about a happenstance of timing) it is most likely (by a big, big margin) the application is NOT BEING WORKED ON at that time, but is sitting in a queue, sitting waiting for someone to actually work on it. The amount of time spent actually working on a given application by any given agent or officer is probably a matter of MINUTES, less than an hour (except for more difficult non-routine issues, like full blown RQ, in which event the Citizenship Officer might, just MIGHT, be spending an amount of time on the application which can be expressed in terms of hours and parts of an hour).

In the meantime, the term "background check" is descriptive and does NOT refer to any particular check or clearance. And thus it warrants another reminder: to some extent there is a background check done each and every time any agent or officer acts on the application. At the least this is, indeed, as simple as suggested by @sarafandee: "Type a person's name into a computer and see if you get any results, voila!" And, again, it is done every time an agent or officer acts on the file since they are required to do a GCMS check every time, and that check includes FOSS, and thus includes (again, at the least) a check for name-record hits in the RCMP criminal history data bases as well as in the U.S. FBI/NCIC database (as shared with Canadian authorities).

In addition to the GCMS check (which, again, is repeated throughout the process), there are two other formal CLEARANCES: the RCMP criminal and security clearance, and the CSIS security clearance. Neither of these are done by IRCC. They are done by the RCMP and CSIS respectively. These can involve far more than a name-record check into an electronic data base. The referral for these clearances is (probably still) made in the same task-step that opens the file in GCMS, that is at the same time the application is given AOR. Processing the application does NOT wait on receipt of these clearances. Details about this aspect of the process are strictly confidential, but enough is known to recognize these clearances are usually complete and entered into GCMS well by the time a processing agent opens the file in a local office. There are exceptions, of course, such that a few applicants are the subject of more extensive criminality or security checks. And yes, some are referred to Canadian authorities overseas for further inquiry (and these, in particular, tend to take a long time). BUT, for the vast majority of applicants the RCMP and CSIS clearances are done, no problem, no delay. Sometimes an update of the clearances is required, but here too the parameters for when an update is required are confidential.

There are different levels of access to GCMS records. I do not know for sure, but my sense is that Help Centre agents either have the same level of access as the individual applicant (such as what the applicant would receive in response to an ATIP request) or perhaps a just slightly higher level of access. This level of access reveals very little about either the RCMP or CSIS clearances, at most indicating complete but probably, usually, indicating an open field EVEN IF the clearance has actually been done and entered by the respective agency (RCMP or CSIS). Again, details at this level are largely confidential. But most indications suggest that even when the RCMP and CSIS have submitted their respective clearance, GCMS does NOT show these as completed UNLESS and UNTIL the appropriate official at IRCC has taken a particular step in processing. It is not clear whether this can be a processing agent preparing an assessment of the application to be referred to the responsible Citizenship Officer for a decision on the application, or whether this is something done by the Citizenship Officer.

IN ANY EVENT, it is very likely it is true that the application is waiting for the clearances to be "complete" until that processing step is done. So it is NOT a lie for the Help Centre agents to say the application is waiting for a background check to be completed. Even though the respective agency itself has in fact completed and filed the respective clearance.

In the meantime, the processing agent and/or Citizenship Officer also perform tasks on the application which fall under the ambit of what one would describe as a "background" check. For some applicants, for example, there is a more thorough screening of the applicant's employment or address history. I.E. background checking. Ranging from making telephone calls and researching open sources, such as researching information in internet accounts including LinkedIn, to doing GCMS checks on the identified employers (primarily to see if the named employer has been tagged or flagged in other immigration checks). Again, all this is probably done in a matter of minutes, not hours, though for some perhaps it involves an hour or more.


THUS, OVERALL:

It is quite likely that some Help Centre agents give a generic response to status inquiries, a response which is roughly some version of "waiting for background check (or clearance)," whether or not the application is in fact waiting for some particular clearance. This is probably, in part, just the fastest, easiest way to conclude the telephone call (so the Help Centre agent can get to another caller, one with a REAL question), and is employed (by the Help Centre agent) when it is readily apparent the application is simply IN QUEUE waiting for the next step to be done. There really is no other answer which would be any more useful or informative.

If my impression is correct, that is if my sense of this is correct, and based on a long-term pattern of anecdotal reports in conjunction with what is known about how the process works I do have quite a bit of confidence about this, it is a fairly typical Help Centre agent response to inquiries which are basically in the nature of "Are we there YET?" (And yes, this appropriately evokes an image of impatient children in the back seat of a car on a long trip. Sorry, but that is how it usually is.)

That is, when the Help Centre agent interprets the inquiry to really be "Are we there YET?" the agent is, in effect, simply replying "NO, your application is in QUEUE waiting for the next step."

And this is NOT a lie. The next step will always involve, at the least, another GCMS background check. And that must be done before the next action is taken, be that earlier in the process when the next step is scheduling a test and interview, or at the end phase of the process when a Citizenship Officer makes the final decision to grant citizenship and schedule the applicant for an oath ceremony.
Thank you for the detailed explanation.
 

dpenabill

VIP Member
Apr 2, 2010
6,432
3,176
I don't get it how long does it take to background check someone 10 years? after you gave a residency to that person it takes you 14months to do a background check? let's say that person is criminal, it takes you 14months to realize that??? this is just bs to me
See my previous post. With some unusual exceptions (usually involving complex security checks abroad by CSIS, almost always involving particular applicants who already know, and know well, WHY), for the overwhelming vast majority of the time an application is in process the application is sitting in a QUEUE waiting for an agent or officer to take action, waiting for the next step to be done.

So right, of course it does NOT take 14 months to do a background check. BUT it clearly takes 10 or 14 months for some applications to be picked up out of the queue and have the next step processed. Including further background checks. Again, there is at least an additional GCMS background check conducted on the applicant EACH and EVERY time there is any action taken on the application . . . which almost always takes no more than a very few minutes, since the additional GCMS checks are largely perfunctory, not thorough. (At some point in processing there is a more extensive GCMS check, the extent of which probably varies depending on particular factors in the individual case; such as whether the agent runs a full GCMS check on each address and employer the applicant has disclosed in the address and work history, among various cross-check methods for verifying information not just about the applicant but also collateral information.)

Ever stand in a grocery store line just to buy three items, which will take the clerk maybe 80 seconds to process, but the line is long and slow? Multiply that by three or four hundred, or more. To be clear, when you return home twenty minutes later than the significant other expected, it is not because the clerk took fifteen or twenty minutes to cash out your three items, it is you had to wait in line that long until the cashier processed you.

No rocket science necessary here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NB61

cn2017

Star Member
Oct 27, 2017
108
48
I fully understand that some people might want to help by justifying what IRRCC does and appreciate helpful details, but let’s not forget that while some of the agents are doing a great job, there are many that are not and causing a lot turmoil by messing with people’s lives. Experience shows that almost everything depends on the agent that handles the case. A case normally does not take more than 9 to 12 months to process even if it’s a complex case and after doing all the checks and clearances. When you see a case that has been taking more than 12 months to process, it almost always means one thing; SOMEONE DID NOT OR IS NOT DOING THEIR JOB. To justify that, they use terms such as back ground check, security clearance, in process, residency check and some other BS that you have been hearing. When there is no transparency in an organization and specially public sector, it’s very easy to not work and get away with it. Now, in a government agency like IRCC, since everything can easily be labeled as confidential without any audit, of course some agents will abuse the system to do whatever they want knowing they cannot and wont be questioned by anyone. If applicants call to ask why their case has been taking 18 months without any reason or explanation, they just say “it’s in process and we will contact you if we need something” and back to sleep. If the applicants call again and again, then they will say something like “the background check is in process and it’s done by a third party, so we have no control and we don’t know how long can take”. Now, I have worked for several governments including the federal government and I know how they work. These so called security clearance or background check or whatever other BS they call them do not take more than a week max to complete them all. In fact, most applications can be completed in less than 9 months, and 12 months is for worst case scenarios and complex cases. So, basically any case that has gone over 12 months (with very very few exceptions) is either being handled by one of those useless agents or is not being worked on at all. Also, I would like to make it clear that the call center agents are not there to answer “real questions” because they don’t have the knowledge to answer just about any question or they simply don’t care. They just read the eCAS and tell you what everybody else can see or they will say go read the instructions. I had “real questions” when I was applying for PR because they had changed the process a bit back then and some documents had not been updated, but every time I called the call center they gave the same useless answers: “everything is online, go read the instructions” I then said, believe me I did many times, but there is conflicting info that I want to clarify. They said: “just read the online instructions and do what you understand”. That’s how they answered “real questions” and now no need to go through their answers to citizenship applicants, we all know the ridiculousness of it. Both the call center agents and those unproductive agents who are wasting applicants time and taxpayers money should be questioned. Regarding call center agents, if they have nothing useful to say and just can read the eCAS, then why are they even there? Why are they wasting everyone’s time? And the real problem which is those unwilling to work agents at IRCC should be replaced by people who don’t mind work and don’t need to sleep 7 hours per day on the job.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: itsmyid

hanyj123

Full Member
Nov 21, 2016
31
7
could you please update my timeline?

hanyj123

oath letter: Dec 18, 2018
oath ceremony: Jan 9, 2019 (Mississauga)

I need to attend an important wedding in Hawaii on Jan 26. So I wrote a webform regarding that. After three days, I got the letter. I’m not sure the webform worked.
 

nazam80

Hero Member
Dec 28, 2010
410
22
Category........
Visa Office......
Vegreville
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
App. Filed.......
18/08/2011 for PR and Visitor permit extension
Doc's Request.
Police certificate requested on 18th sep 2012 , fingers prints requested on 1st nov 2012
File Transfer...
Filed transferred to local office on 5th sep 2012
Med's Done....
11th August 2011
Another disappointing week and now they will go on holidays. I completed my 14 months and 6 days. I mean where on earth it takes 14 months to process an application. The funny part is that I had my test and Interview 9 months and 6 days ago and waiting for oath since then. It's just ridiculous.
 

itsmyid

Champion Member
Jul 26, 2012
2,250
649
Another disappointing week and now they will go on holidays. I completed my 14 months and 6 days. I mean where on earth it takes 14 months to process an application. The funny part is that I had my test and Interview 9 months and 6 days ago and waiting for oath since then. It's just ridiculous.
Well, at least you had your test and interview already... 14 months and 8 days later I am still waiting for test invite
 

Husky9

Full Member
Dec 15, 2012
21
9
Hello,

Could you please update my timeline?
Name: Husky9
Line: 856

Decision Made: Nov 19, 2018
Oath Letter: Dec 03, 2018
Oath Ceremony: Dec 19, 2018

Good luck guys!
 

cn2017

Star Member
Oct 27, 2017
108
48
Another disappointing week and now they will go on holidays. I completed my 14 months and 6 days. I mean where on earth it takes 14 months to process an application. The funny part is that I had my test and Interview 9 months and 6 days ago and waiting for oath since then. It's just ridiculous.
The agents that are handling our cases been on holidays since last christmas apparently.
 

zorroo

Hero Member
Apr 1, 2013
502
35
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
See my previous post. With some unusual exceptions (usually involving complex security checks abroad by CSIS, almost always involving particular applicants who already know, and know well, WHY), for the overwhelming vast majority of the time an application is in process the application is sitting in a QUEUE waiting for an agent or officer to take action, waiting for the next step to be done.

So right, of course it does NOT take 14 months to do a background check. BUT it clearly takes 10 or 14 months for some applications to be picked up out of the queue and have the next step processed. Including further background checks. Again, there is at least an additional GCMS background check conducted on the applicant EACH and EVERY time there is any action taken on the application . . . which almost always takes no more than a very few minutes, since the additional GCMS checks are largely perfunctory, not thorough. (At some point in processing there is a more extensive GCMS check, the extent of which probably varies depending on particular factors in the individual case; such as whether the agent runs a full GCMS check on each address and employer the applicant has disclosed in the address and work history, among various cross-check methods for verifying information not just about the applicant but also collateral information.)

Ever stand in a grocery store line just to buy three items, which will take the clerk maybe 80 seconds to process, but the line is long and slow? Multiply that by three or four hundred, or more. To be clear, when you return home twenty minutes later than the significant other expected, it is not because the clerk took fifteen or twenty minutes to cash out your three items, it is you had to wait in line that long until the cashier processed you.

No rocket science necessary here.
@dpenabill : Can you explain to us which kind of security checks get done by CSIS? I do not understand when there is no criminal records for people based on RCMP database and people have been in canada what else needs to be checked?
 

dpenabill

VIP Member
Apr 2, 2010
6,432
3,176
@dpenabill : Can you explain to us which kind of security checks get done by CSIS? I do not understand when there is no criminal records for people based on RCMP database and people have been in canada what else needs to be checked?
Can you explain to us which kind of security checks get done by CSIS?

No. Far from it.

At least not beyond what is more or less obvious, easily discerned from the statutory proscriptions as to security-related prohibitions and inadmissibility criteria (such as involvement in war crimes, direct or indirect support or participation in terrorism or terrorist organizations, participation or affiliation or association with criminal organizations or organized crime enterprises, and so on).

What CSIS does, including in its role of providing background security clearances for IRCC and other government agencies, is way, way behind very, very dark curtains.

What we know, beyond what the relevant statutes reference, derives from very limited views of the context, circumstances, and facts in only a rather FEW actual cases, and involves more than a little extrapolation from that information. The sources range from media reports about cases involving CSIS (including the more notorious and egregious examples, such as the abuses evident in the Mahar case, but also from media reports about more high-profile challenges in security hold cases), to a number of judicial decisions referring to security related cases, such as cases in which inadmissibility decisions are challenged, citizenship or PR status revocation cases involving accusations of things like supporting a terrorist organization or being associated with organized crime (including gangs), and a rather small number of Mandamus cases in which delays apparently due to outstanding CSIS clearances were at issue.

As I previously suggested, and otherwise have oft alluded, I am confident that the vast, vast majority of those individuals for whom there is a lengthy delay related to a significant CSIS background inquiry or investigation KNOW IT and KNOW WHY. More than a few will deny knowing what or why. Such denials generally lack credibility.

For the PR who honestly has no idea why CSIS might be investigating his or her background, the odds are very good, very good by a big margin, there is no CSIS clearance problem. For example, you know whether you were in Serbia or Bosnia in the '90s and if so, what you were doing, who you were working for, and with little more than some casual homework you can discern if there is any chance that employment raises security related concerns. (Example: a doctor had been employed by an aid organization which subsequently, well after the doctor ceased providing medical services through that organization, became affiliated with an organization designated as terrorism-related, and thus the doctor's application for citizenship was held up for MANY YEARS, and there was never any doubt about why, the question was only whether the court should compel CIC to grant citizenship or if, in the opposite direction, CIC could terminate the doctor's PR status based on inadmissibility. While that was a key issue in that case, there were other complicating elements and sorry I do not recall the specific outcome, except to note the court had little problem with the fact processing the citizenship application had been delayed for many years.)

REMINDER: Again, in the vast majority of instances there is a generic references to "waiting for background check," what is happening is basically NOTHING, the application IS IN QUEUE, WAITING FOR SOMEONE TO TAKE THE NEXT STEP.