UPFRONT: I am NO expert generally. I am especially NOT well-informed about the process for minor applicants.
Thus, as to this particular query, I am NO more qualified to answer than anyone who is familiar with the requirements and process generally, and who carefully reads the instructions and applies them to the questions asked in the application form.
But I can read instructions. And, frankly, the relevant question and instructions here are straight-forward. I see NO reason to deviate from truthfully answering what is asked and providing the information requested.
Why IRCC wants to know what dates the minor has been outside Canada since becoming a PR, if the minor has been a PR for more than five years, I do not know. Indeed, I also do not know the purpose of Items 9C or 9D in this application. (Section 5(2) minor applicants do NOT need to meet a physical presence requirement.)
BUT more to the point, I do NOT know of any reason to second-guess what IRCC is asking for here. Generally following the instructions and giving honest, accurate information in response, WORKS. So why second-guess the question?
So I am responding further . . .
. . . NOT because I can offer any additional insight into what 9B is about or whether IRCC has poorly composed this item
. . . NOT because I think this question is complicated or confusing
. . . NOT because I think this question warrants getting into the weeds
I am responding further to address the tendency to second-guess questions or instructions, and because responses to such queries in this forum too often evoke
off-the-cuff and
how-it-should-be responses rather than answers based on reading and following the instructions as written.
To be clear: with the caveat I do not know minor application issues all that much, this nonetheless appears to be something which falls squarely into the admonition: "
if in doubt, follow the instructions; otherwise, yep, follow the instructions." That means answer the question asked, truthfully, accurately, and provide the information requested.
NO REAL NEED TO READ THIS POST ANY FURTHER . The rest of this can be easily
SKIPPED. Follow the instructions. Provide the requested information. No need to wander into the weeds.
But I am here to wander into the weeds . . . here, in this particular response, to caution against second-guessing application questions or instructions.
Frankly, as already noted, I do not see any complicated or confusing issues lurking here. Item 9B asks a straight-forward question, and instructs the applicant (well, actually, the responsible adult completing the application on behalf of the minor applicant) to fill in a chart with all the dates the minor was outside Canada during the last five years or since becoming a PR. As I will repeat, rather often, "
if in doubt, follow the instructions; otherwise, yep, follow the instructions." I see no reason to deviate from this here.
And that's the best I can offer here. I see no downside to following the instruction
EVEN IF IRCC intended 9B to be, like 9C and 9D, about the "
past five (5) years, or since the date the minor became a permanent resident, whichever date is more recent."
I always see a downside to responding contrary to the literal meaning of a question if that involves making a factual misrepresentation. There are good reasons why prudent observers emphasize the importance of being honest, accurate, and complete.
This is not complicated. Was the minor outside Canada for more than 730 days in the last five years or since becoming a PR? If the minor became a PR in 2014 and has been outside Canada more than 730 days since then, the truthful, accurate answer to this question is obviously [Yes]. So [Yes] it is. And then you fill in the chart with the dates. No reason to be confused or to make it more complicated.
Unfortunately this forum tends to invite too many
off-the-cuff and
how-it-should-be responses rather than answers based on reading and following the instructions as written.
There is nothing about the question or instructions here which is confusing . . .
UNLESS you are second-guessing what IRCC really wants, or second-guessing the reason or purpose for this item. On rare occasions there are apparent reasons to second-guess what an application item is really about and what information IRCC really wants. Even when that happens, however, responding to the question literally, truthfully, and providing the information requested, ALMOST ALWAYS WORKS.
Yeah, this forum is rife with all sorts of second-guessing IRCC. Most of that is not worth thinking about. Some of it is deliberate distraction.
And even when there is apparent cause for some second-guessing, generally the safe approach is simply following the instructions as written, answering the question as asked, providing the information as requested. That almost always works. Even if that is not precisely what IRCC wants.
Sure, as I have noted, I am not much familiar with minor applications. In particular, frankly,
I do not know what 9B, 9C, or 9D are really about. So I could not begin to second-guess what IRCC wants if that is in any way different from what the questions literally ask.
In particular, I am not familiar with what this "five year" time period is about, at least not in relation to the minor applicant's personal qualifications for a grant of citizenship. This is an application for minors applying under Section 5(2) in the Citizenship Act. There is no actual physical presence requirement for such applicants.
So even if one is second-guessing what 9B, 9C, or 9D are about, it is NOT about the minor applicant meeting a requirement to have physically spent at least 1095 days IN Canada.
Thus, for example, I do not follow what
@harirajmohan means here:
Obviously, there are numerous questions in both adult and minor application forms about matters outside "
the last 5 years," ranging from certain questions about prohibitions (has the applicant "
ever" been . . . and in "
the last 10 years" has the applicant had . . . or "
While a permanent resident, has the minor . . .") as well as the question about whether the applicant "
ever held . . . status" in another country, among others. Clearly, many questions posed those applying for citizenship are NOT about only the last 5 years maximum. Not even close. Indeed, most of the questions about the last five years are related to just one element, about evidence of actual physical presence, about what shows the applicant has met this single requirement (among many requirements) . . . but again, Section 5(2) minor applicants do NOT have an actual physical presence requirement.
For items 9C and 9D, it is clear that the period referenced is indeed a maximum of five (5) years, but we know that because the period is explicitly based on the more recent date . . . five years or date of becoming a PR.
I have no idea why
@harirajmohan would interpret the scope of 9B to be the same as that for 9C and 9D despite it being worded differently. Rather weird to assert that something worded differently is intended to mean the same thing. That's not how things ordinarily work.
For this particular question, as I have noted, I see NO downside in responding to the question as asked, truthfully, without second-guessing whether IRCC wants something else. Worst case scenario is the applicant is giving IRCC more information than it wants.
Thus, likewise, I see no reason to explain. The date the minor became a PR is right there, in response to item 9A. The chart for detailing time outside Canada requires From-To dates so there is nothing there to confuse IRCC officials about what periods of time were before and after the minor became a PR. Nothing to explain.
Generally following the instructions works. Second-guessing
what-IRCC-really-wants, especially if it is based on interpreting a question to ask something other than what the question literally asks, tends to be a recipe for problems.
