I still haven't heard back from IRCC. No communication whatsoever since Feb after my test. I called again and they just told me all is well and I should wait. It has been a year and a week now since I put in my citizenship application. I'm considering calling my local MP to follow it up so I can know exactly what is going on
Refugee status cessation and PRs applying for citizenship
- Thread starter dpenabill
- Start date
Just a follow up. I did contact my MP office last week. They promised to follow up for me. It's been 1 yr and 1.5 months now. I called IRCC. Agent said he is going to contact my local office to update my file. I'm hoping that spells good news. I believe if they had any case against me, by now they would have at least communicated. Its been 8 months since my test. What can I reasonably expect at this point in time?
Forecasting how things will go from here is difficult, at best, and depends a lot more on the particulars in your individual case . . . as has been discussed, generally, throughout this topic.
Without revisiting any of your particular circumstances, and thus speaking GENERALLY, for any PR-refugee who has had a home country passport and used that passport, and especially if it was used to travel to the home country, it is possible that processing the citizenship application is suspended, either in effect or perhaps even formally, pending an investigatory referral to determine whether cessation proceedings should be pursued.
We do NOT KNOW how much risk there is of this. We are aware the amount of risk probably depends on particular facts and circumstances, including the nature and extent to which such a passport was used, and more in particular, the frequency, duration, and purpose of trips to the home country.
We suspect that the risk may be LOW unless there was a blatant pattern rather obviously indicating regular use of the passport and frequent or lengthy stays in the home country. But we are NOT at all confident about this.
So, a PR/refugee who potentially meets the criteria for cessation and who has had a citizenship application in process for many months, months beyond the test date, could
-- get a notice to attend an oath ceremony any day
-- have to go on waiting weeks or even months before being scheduled to take the oath, or
-- be waiting on the results of an investigatory referral which will determine whether citizenship will be granted or there will a referral to CBSA to begin cessation proceedings
-- have to go on waiting weeks or even months before being scheduled to take the oath, or
-- be waiting on the results of an investigatory referral which will determine whether citizenship will be granted or there will a referral to CBSA to begin cessation proceedings
I have NO guess which of these is more likely in your case.
Unfortunately, no news in these cases is only a bit of good news (in that there is no bad news, at least as yet) . . . it appears that IRCC often (perhaps even typically) does not notify applicants of holds on processing for investigatory referrals, even if the application is formally suspended pending action by another government body. So, again, it is very difficult to guess where things are at . . . unless and until there is some direct indication from IRCC.
PLEASE keep the forum advised as to what you learn and how it goes.
Thanks as always dpenabill. Always refreshing to get your point of view!
I will wait indeed to see the update on my file. It's all a mystery as of now. What I'm starting to doubt though is that a cessation proceeding could have been launched. I revisited the government website and it says for this to be done.,clear copies of passport and other documents must be obtained. To my knowledge this was not done. The interviewer 8 months ago said they would request for them but this hasn't been done to date. Something tells me it's too long also to wait for an internal decision as to whether the file should be forwarded to CBSA to take on and decide to initiate cessation.
So it leaves me uncertain as always. I will try following up with MP office and see if there is any info they might have obtained regarding my file
I will wait indeed to see the update on my file. It's all a mystery as of now. What I'm starting to doubt though is that a cessation proceeding could have been launched. I revisited the government website and it says for this to be done.,clear copies of passport and other documents must be obtained. To my knowledge this was not done. The interviewer 8 months ago said they would request for them but this hasn't been done to date. Something tells me it's too long also to wait for an internal decision as to whether the file should be forwarded to CBSA to take on and decide to initiate cessation.
So it leaves me uncertain as always. I will try following up with MP office and see if there is any info they might have obtained regarding my file
Last edited:
The web form is not helpful at all. I would advise anyone in a similar situation to mine not to waste their time.
***Thank you for contacting Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC).
We verified the information you provided and can confirm that your application is still in process.
All the required documents and information have been received by the responsible office for the moment.
While the processing times may vary with each case, we will make all the necessary efforts to finalize your application as soon as possible.
Rest assured that you will be informed as soon as a decision is reached or if additional information is needed.
We hope the information provided is helpful in assisting you with your enquiry. ****
I WILL NOW WAIT ON MP RESPONSE AND GCMS NOTES on what could be happening behind the scenes with my file
***Thank you for contacting Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC).
We verified the information you provided and can confirm that your application is still in process.
All the required documents and information have been received by the responsible office for the moment.
While the processing times may vary with each case, we will make all the necessary efforts to finalize your application as soon as possible.
Rest assured that you will be informed as soon as a decision is reached or if additional information is needed.
We hope the information provided is helpful in assisting you with your enquiry. ****
I WILL NOW WAIT ON MP RESPONSE AND GCMS NOTES on what could be happening behind the scenes with my file
MPs are very busy with election and you can’t expect any movement until after oct 21st. I hope you live in a riding for safe LPC (liberal). And I hope your MP will win the re-election so that he/she can follow up.
True. The last time I called they did say they are busy with election. But promised 15 business days to give me a response.15 business days from the 24th September when I submitted my request. At some point I'm sure that they will follow up.
I also ordered gcms notes. I have more hope in these though I have to wait 30 calendar days. I submitted only 2 days ago. That is assuming I do not get a feed back from IRCC with a decision or request before then.
I also ordered gcms notes. I have more hope in these though I have to wait 30 calendar days. I submitted only 2 days ago. That is assuming I do not get a feed back from IRCC with a decision or request before then.
“There is no loss of permanent residence status if refugee protection is removed because of a change in country conditions [A108(1)(e)].”
“Cessation: clarification and examples
The following examples of situations when a case could be referred for further investigation are intended as guidance only. Each case must be assessed based on the individual facts.
A resettled refugee immediately returns to their country of origin
This could be grounds for investigation. The officer should try to find out why the refugee returned and for what length of time, and whether they voluntarily re-availed themselves of the protection of the country and/or re-established themselves in that country.
An individual eventually returns to their country of origin due to improved country conditions
CIC does not usually pursue cessation against a refugee for changed country conditions when the individual has become a permanent resident of Canada. Improved country conditions [A108(1)(e)] is omitted from the cessation grounds that lead to loss of permanent residence in A46(1)(c.1).”
This is some information I retrieved from the CIC website today. @dpenabill please tell me if this indicates a policy shift and correct me I’m wrong about this being new information?
Does this mean a change in country conditions will justify travel and thus allow the refugee PR to keep their status? Thank you for all your insightful analysis on this thread and others.
“Cessation: clarification and examples
The following examples of situations when a case could be referred for further investigation are intended as guidance only. Each case must be assessed based on the individual facts.
A resettled refugee immediately returns to their country of origin
This could be grounds for investigation. The officer should try to find out why the refugee returned and for what length of time, and whether they voluntarily re-availed themselves of the protection of the country and/or re-established themselves in that country.
An individual eventually returns to their country of origin due to improved country conditions
CIC does not usually pursue cessation against a refugee for changed country conditions when the individual has become a permanent resident of Canada. Improved country conditions [A108(1)(e)] is omitted from the cessation grounds that lead to loss of permanent residence in A46(1)(c.1).”
This is some information I retrieved from the CIC website today. @dpenabill please tell me if this indicates a policy shift and correct me I’m wrong about this being new information?
Does this mean a change in country conditions will justify travel and thus allow the refugee PR to keep their status? Thank you for all your insightful analysis on this thread and others.
This appears to be the same policy that has been employed for a long time. No formal change.
It warrants emphasizing that I am NOT an expert. In many of my posts I mention that NOT all refugees have the same exposure to potential cessation proceedings. I do not attempt to distinguish who is on which side of the distinction. That is beyond what I grasp. This is part of why I so emphatically emphasize that anyone who is a PR-refugee who has obtained a home country passport or traveled to the home country be very careful going forward AND, given how much is at stake, preferably obtain competent advice from reputable legal counsel before applying for citizenship.
Most of my observations here have been about reavailment of home country protection or re-acquiring home country nationality, which are IRPA Sections 108.(1)(a) and 108.(1)(b) respectively, and which (it appears) are the grounds for most cessation cases. That said, 108.(1)(c) and 108.(1)(d) are not all that different, 108.(1)(c) being about obtaining the protection of another country by becoming a national of that country, and 108.(1)(d) being about re-establishing oneself in the country fled from (this is mostly about stateless persons who have no "home country" so to say and no recognized nationality).
From the beginning, when Section 46.(1)(c.1) IRPA was adopted, in December 2012, cessation on the grounds prescribed by Section 108.(1)(e) was NOT included as a determination automatically terminating PR status.
To be clear about the difference, where "the reasons for which the person sought refugee protection have ceased to exist" (that is Section 108.(1)(e) IRPA) that is still grounds for cessation of protected person status. If, however, the government pursues proceedings to determine protected person status has ceased on this ground, that ceases the person's protected person status BUT does NOT trigger the automatic termination of PR status. (Many refugees do not have PR status, so cessation of status on this ground will terminate their status to remain in Canada; many refugees do have PR status, and this ground does not affect them . . . which is how it was for any of the cessation grounds prior to December 2012, when becoming a PR meant that grounds for cessation of protected person status had no practical effect, no legal impact on the PR's status as a PR.)
Again, this has been the law since 2012 and the respective policy does not appear to have changed much OTHER THAN it appears the Liberal government has been at least significantly less aggressive in pursuing cessation cases.
And to put this in context, it is the government which chooses what grounds to proceed with in a cessation case. I believe somewhere in posts above I address the case where the affected PR and protected person persuaded the decision-maker (I forget the precise procedural tribunal format for cessation proceedings) to determine his protected person status ceased pursuant to Section 108.(1)(e) and not any of the others, which did not terminate that individual's PR status, just his protected person status. The Minister appealed, asserting that the decision-maker should have determined status ceased based on one of the other grounds (I forget which), which would have also resulted in the termination of the PR's PR status. As best I recall, and my apologies for not revisiting this and getting it right because it does matter, it was the government which initially pursued cessation on multiple grounds including Section 108.(1)(e) . . . so the Court ruled that it was within the decision-maker's discretion to determine protected person status ceased on this ground making it unnecessary to consider the other grounds. Thus, that individual's PR status was saved.
My guess is that the government does not make that mistake generally, especially after that case. That is, if the facts support a cessation case based on Section 108.(1)(a) to Section 108.(1)(d), the government will proceed on those grounds and NOT Section 108.(1)(e), even if it might also have a case for cessation based on Section 108.(1)(e).
IT WARRANTS NOTING that Section 108.(1)(e) may apply to a refugee who has never had any more contact at all with the home country. It is entirely about the cessation of need for protection. Not about an individual refugee's reasons for fleeing. This is mostly about refugees temporarily located in another country who can be, in effect, repatriated . . . such as when a conflict ends and stability has been restored in the country they fled from. I am NOT an expert, so I do not know, for example, how this might affect a refugee who, for example, fled because his or her or their sexual orientation endangered them in the home country if in the meantime that country has totally changed its policies and practices so that such individuals would no longer face the dangers they fled.
But in any event, if the ONLY reason why a protected person needed protection no longer exists in the home country, that is a ground for cessation of protected person status BUT that does NOT automatically terminate PR status. And again, this has nothing to do with whether the protected person traveled to the home country or not.
FOR CLARIFICATION: Again, I am NO expert. My strong sense, however, is that changed conditions in the home country making it safe to travel to the home country will NOT CONSTITUTE A DEFENSE to cessation proceedings brought on grounds set out in Section 108.(1)(a) to Section 108.(1)(d). Changed conditions may be asserted to support a defense that travel to the home country was NOT intended to constitute reavailment, such as asserting there were compelling reasons to BRIEFLY visit the home country (to attend to terminally ill parent there, for example) anticipating that one could so safely, without protection from the country itself. But getting into that level of litigating a cessation case is way, way beyond the scope of what I dare address much . . . leading back to the frequent admonition to obtain competent assistance from reputable legal counsel.
Last edited:
salem10
Hero Member
- Jul 6, 2010
- 75
- Visa Office......
- Buffalo
- NOC Code......
- 0711/4131/4121
- Pre-Assessed..
- Yes
- App. Filed.......
- 10-05-2010
- Doc's Request.
- Nov 02, 2010
- AOR Received.
- May 19, 2011 from buffalo
- IELTS Request
- submitted writtin sample (accepted)
- Med's Request
- April 14, 2012
- Med's Done....
- June 10, 2011, again in May 02, 2012 -medical furtherance June29-2012
- Interview........
- waived
- Passport Req..
- Waiting
- VISA ISSUED...
- Waiting
- LANDED..........
- 20-06-2015
Some thoughts Based on above analysis, is that protected person with PR statues can apply for his/her protection to be removed?
Is that an alternative to live back normally?. Of course if that condition that his/her flea is not exist any more.
There is another conference or forum at this site where refugee and protected person issues are addressed more specifically. I do not read those topics much and do not know to what extent there is, or is not, informed discussion regarding issues related to cessation of protected person status (I occasionally peruse discussions there, just to keep track of any potential news about cessation). I deliberately steer clear of participating in those discussions because I am not at all well informed about refugee issues and I try to stay close to what I know.
I repeat it often: I am NO expert and I am especially NOT an expert in matters involving refugees. Far, far from it.
This topic is fairly narrowly focused. It started as a Heads-UP warning . . . Indeed, this topic is something of an anomaly for me. I RELUCTANTLY came to this subject, and started this topic, a little over four years ago. That was in August 2015. That was nearly THREE years after the Harper government added cessation of protected person status to the list of events terminating Permanent Resident status. That was AFTER I noticed IAD and Federal Court decisions in which Refugee-PRs applying for citizenship were not only being DENIED citizenship, but losing PR status. That was after seeing some forum participants still advising ALL prospective citizenship applicants that it was better to apply with a valid passport, with no caveat at all for those who might be a Refugee-PR and who would put their status at RISK by obtaining their home country passport. At the time, it appeared that the help centre for CIC (this was before the name change to IRCC) was often, if not usually, similarly telling prospective citizenship applicants they should have a valid passport when they applied.
Some forum reporting indicated that even some lawyers were likewise failing to make a distinction for Refugee-PRs.
AND NO ONE in this forum, and it appeared almost no one anywhere, was warning Refugee-PRs, that they could lose their PR status just because they applied for a home country passport.
NO ONE, no one anywhere it seemed, was warning Refugee-PRs that IF they had traveled to their home country, applying for citizenship could trigger a cessation inquiry potentially leading not just to their citizenship application being denied, but loss of PR status altogether.
And by August 2015 the contrast between what was happening to Refugee-PRs applying for citizenship and the utter silence here, in conjunction with commonly offered bad advice to obtain a passport, I felt obligated to at least bring the subject up and help others be aware of the RISKS, of this rather serious pitfall. So I started this topic. And of course, if I am going to comment I make a concerted effort to do the homework, to get informed, to understand the system and the process.
But in doing the latter I have not wandered much into refugee issues other than this one narrow issue: what can lead to a cessation inquiry and potential loss of protected person status, which since 2012 AUTOMATICALLY terminates PR status. Of course doing this has required doing some homework into a few related collateral matters and of course to become familiar with the context in which these issues arise.
BUT this is not a topic for discussing refugee issues generally. Not even for discussing cessation of protected person status for refugees who have not obtained PR status. Of course the grounds and issues overlap, so much of the discussion here about cessation applies, as well, to refugees who are not PRs . . . but there are many other issues for refugees who are not PRs beyond what this topic is about.
Finally, REMEMBER, that cessation policy is basically the application and enforcement of UNHCR policy and rules. Section 108 is almost verbatim the same as the comparable UNHCR provisions.
What is different is that beginning in 2012, Canada suddenly started enforcing cessation against PRs who had obtained PR status as a refugee. In fact, part of why this change in law was so utterly shocking was that the Harper government then proceeded with the process to terminate the PR status of PRs who had traveled to their home country WHEN DOING SO WAS IN NO WAY RESTRICTED BY CANADIAN LAW, when there was NO HINT doing so might in any way jeopardize their PR status. This was about as close to a penalty applied retroactively as one will ever see. PRs punished based on a change in law in 2012 for activities done YEARS BEFORE 2012. For example, one of the more high profile cases was against a PR in 2013 or 2014 on reavailment grounds based on trips to the home country a DECADE before the law changed.
ALL THAT SAID . . .
ALL THAT SAID . . . I am not quite sure what you are asking. Whether or not a refugee can return to live in the country where he or she was living before fleeing, or is the refugee's home country, mostly depends on whether that country allows the individual to return home. The answer to that question is rooted in the OTHER COUNTRY's LAWS and RULES . . . NOT Canadian law or rules.
There is no law which requires Canadian PRs or refugees to stay in Canada. They can leave and live anywhere else in the world they want, SO FAR AS CANADIAN LAW goes. (To keep status in Canada they must of course still meet their obligations under Canadian rules.)
Otherwise, as I tried to address in my previous post, if conditions change in the home country, or in the country the refugee fled from, so that it is safe to return and live there, the law works differently DEPENDING on what type of refugee the individual is (which gets into questions I do not know the answer to) and DEPENDING on whether the refugee has Canadian PR status. Section 108(1)(e) allows for the cessation of refugee status where "the reasons for which the person sought refugee protection have ceased to exist." But cessation on that ground has NO effect on a refugee who is also a Canadian PR.
Quick update. Today i finally received my gcms notes. Everything looks normal however i noticed that it says my application status is on hold. Status reason is blank. So I'm wondering whether its being on hold has anything to do with investigation and action regarding cessation or referral to any other govt body as it is not indicated anywhere on the report. The government website for IRCC indicates that when such actions to investigate eligibility of citizenship ate done the gcms status is set to on hold and the reason set to suspended. In my case the reason was not, so I'm confused.
It says prohibition, residence clearance is pending probably because file is om hold. Criminality passed as it was probably done before the test. Knowledge and language passed from test obviously. Thats it.
It gives me a bit of insight. Since Feb nothing has been done on my file! Woow. Could be in for a long wait.
Meanwhile i applied for à PR card renewal. I wonder if it will be affected by this. Anyone who can help me with my concerns? Thanks
It says prohibition, residence clearance is pending probably because file is om hold. Criminality passed as it was probably done before the test. Knowledge and language passed from test obviously. Thats it.
It gives me a bit of insight. Since Feb nothing has been done on my file! Woow. Could be in for a long wait.
Meanwhile i applied for à PR card renewal. I wonder if it will be affected by this. Anyone who can help me with my concerns? Thanks
As I have oft said, I am NOT an expert. I cannot offer any real help. I very much doubt anyone here can offer any real help other than to reiterate that the best help you can probably obtain would be from a competent lawyer with experience in refugee and cessation matters.
Application for a new PR card:
My sense is that it would have been better to consult with a lawyer BEFORE making an application for a new PR card, there being no need to rush to obtain a new PR card. But you have, so . . . yes, please keep us advised about how that goes.
I do NOT know, for example, to what extent an application for a new PR card might elevate the risk of triggering a decision to proceed with cessation. A PR does NOT need to have a valid PR card. At this juncture you should NOT be traveling abroad anyway (at least certainly NOT traveling abroad using the home country passport), so you do not need a PR card for that. And some provinces (at least Ontario) allow PRs to present expired PR cards, for up to five years after the card expired, to show status for obtaining provincial health care (and it seems that OHIP might not even ask to see proof of immigration status when the OHIP card is due for renewal).
In any event, please let us know how that goes.
Some Additional Observations (which, to a significant extent, restate what has been stated before):
It continues to be impossible for us to precisely KNOW what your situation is or how much your status to stay in Canada is at risk. Unfortunately, however, the appearance of some kind of "hold" is NOT good news. Not certain it is about waiting for CBSA or Public Safety to conduct an inquiry into potential cessation, but that appears to be a rather likely suspect.
As I have suggested multiple times before, this is a situation which suggests you could use competent, professional advice and probably assistance, from a lawyer experienced with refugee matters and with cessation issues in particular. At the least, an in-depth consultation with a lawyer with whom you can share and explain ALL the relevant details CONFIDENTIALLY . . . so that you can be totally honest and be certain to let the lawyer know any and all facts or circumstances which could hurt your case, so the lawyer can help you be fully prepared to address a cessation proceeding if one is commenced.
It is difficult to discuss this without risking extreme implications. On one hand, I wish to avoid unnecessarily causing alarm. Even assuming the hold is about cessation, for example, as long as it is a hold while an inquiry is pending, that does NOT mean CBSA or Public Safety will actually decide to proceed with a cessation case. A month or year or two years from now, maybe this coming week, you could be back on track to be scheduled to take the oath. BUT . . .
On the other hand, however, again assuming the hold is about cessation, and an inquiry is pending, given the combination of obtaining the home country passport, using it, and traveling to the home country, there is a RISK you will be subject to cessation proceedings, and the consequences of that can mean losing all status to remain in Canada.
Obviously it is better if you stopped traveling using the passport, or using the passport for any purpose, and for certain have not revisited the home country in the meantime. That may not be enough to avoid cessation proceedings but it could have influence in making the defense that there were compelling reasons or innocent explanations for obtaining the passport and the travel to the home country, that your actions should not be interpreted to mean you have reavailed yourself of the home country's protection.
Remember, there is a PRESUMPTION of reavailment based on the act of merely obtaining a home country passport. So being prepared to present a persuasive defense that there are compelling reasons and innocent explanations for your actions is your best chance, perhaps your only chance, to avoid cessation, if CBSA or Public Safety commence cessation proceedings. In most immigration matters a lawyer is not important let alone necessary. BUT if cessation proceedings are commenced, this is an immigration matter which virtually demands a lawyer's help; cessation has such draconian consequences, and last I have seen there is still NO H&C relief available, and it is likely to be very tricky navigating the nuances of making the case that there was no reavailment despite a presumption of reavailment in conjunction with additional actions suggesting reavailment (travel using the passport, and especially travel to the home country).
I know you have said you cannot afford a lawyer. I am not well acquainted with organizations in Canada that will help those who cannot afford lawyers, but I believe there are some. But I do know that if cessation proceedings are commenced, and if living in Canada is a high priority for you, it would be prudent to do everything you can to get the help of a lawyer . . . and the prospect of a cessation action at this stage warrants pursuing what you can, everything you can do, to get a lawyer SOONER rather than later.
The situation does not appear to have changed much since one of my earlier responses to you (partial quote with link below) . . . back in February. Except the recent indication in GCMS notes that there is indeed some kind of "hold" on your citizenship application.
I suppose you can wait to see how the PR card application goes . . . but if you see that go into non-routine processing, I'd take that to be a sign to LAWYER-UP SOON.
I wish you good luck . . . and again I hope you keep the forum advised about how things go.
Just a February reminder:
I’m not sure if this will be a good idea. But how about talking to your MP’s office regarding this? MPs’ offices help with immigration matters.