Leave country while citizenship in process

[RJ2020]

As I previously commented, I do not attempt to analyze or second-guess how to properly do this . . . other than to again emphasize that whatever the applicant reports to IRCC, or elects to not report, it is important to be truthful, to not make any misrepresentations, either overtly or by omission.

Applicants have an affirmative obligation to update any changes in the information in their application. Applicants verify they will do so attendant their signature on the application. How to do that is no mystery. It is not complicated.

Applicants may encounter questions during the testing process, or in an interview, in regards to employment or residence, which if honestly answered will reveal they are abroad. There is no doubt that being evasive, let alone outright deceptive, in responding to such questions is misrepresentation.

Otherwise, it is obvious, many applying for citizenship will live abroad after applying, and for many it will go OK, no problem. But there are risks. Logistical and risks of encountering delays or non-routine processing. Trying to conceal from IRCC a move abroad, in order to avoid the risk of delay or non-routine processing, is at the least cutting-it-close to fraud.

Pretending otherwise relying on how easy it might be to get-away-with-it is gambling. Playing the odds. I avoid giving advice generally, but I especially avoid giving gambling advice.

Nonetheless, as I have rather often repeated, I never suggest anyone play Russian Roulette, even though the odds are very good it will be, as some here might say based on the odds, "fine" (odds are five to one the gun goes click, no bullet to the head).

In addition to what I said previously in this regard, I should add that there is a big difference between playing Russian Roulette and gambling on getting-away-with-it when making misrepresentations (including by omission) in the process of applying for citizenship. When playing Russian Roulette, hearing the gun go click is the end of it. No worry that sometime in the future somehow the gun will shoot a projectile into your brain. But for misrepresentations made in connection with a citizenship application, it will never be known for sure the individual got-away-with-it, at least not until he or she dies, since even if it goes OK and citizenship is granted, there is no statute of limitations . . . any misrepresentation made in the process will ALWAYS be grounds for revoking citizenship.

And there is always the option of withdrawing the citizenship application.

Hi, sorry if it's wrong forum, but I'm really nervous, because I already sent my citizenship application in February and regarding section 13, I did not know that I needed to include visitor visas in this section.

When I was 12 years old I was not allowed to have a passport, because I was too young to have a passport, due to our country rules. I had a visitor visa for another country which was included in my father's passport. So, I actually did not have a passport, but I was included in my father's passport as his accompanier/minor.

So, better to say, I had a visa that was attached to my father's passport in that time, but myself, did not have a passport, just a Visitor VISA attached to my father's passport. So, I did not include that information in section 13. In addition, when I checked the instruction guide, it said:

• Tell us which countries you have held status in, and exactly what status you held or currently hold (student, employment/worker, refugee/protected person, permanent resident or citizen).

So, according to the instruction guide, I concluded that visitor visa is not counted as an immigration status.

Do you think it would make the processing time for my application far longer or worse, do you think they would probably return my application?

Please kindly advise on this matter. I appreciate it in advance.

 

[dpenabill]

Hi, sorry if it's wrong forum, but I'm really nervous, because I already sent my citizenship application in February and regarding section 13, I did not know that I needed to include visitor visas in this section.

When I was 12 years old I was not allowed to have a passport, because I was too young to have a passport, due to our country rules. I had a visitor visa for another country which was included in my father's passport. So, I actually did not have a passport, but I was included in my father's passport as his accompanier/minor.

So, better to say, I had a visa that was attached to my father's passport in that time, but myself, did not have a passport, just a Visitor VISA attached to my father's passport. So, I did not include that information in section 13. In addition, when I checked the instruction guide, it said:

• Tell us which countries you have held status in, and exactly what status you held or currently hold (student, employment/worker, refugee/protected person, permanent resident or citizen).

So, according to the instruction guide, I concluded that visitor visa is not counted as an immigration status.

Do you think it would make the processing time for my application far longer or worse, do you think they would probably return my application?

Please kindly advise on this matter. I appreciate it in advance.

I am NOT an expert and I am especially NOT qualified to give personal advice. Moreover, this forum is NOT an appropriate place to get advice. For advice, consult with a properly licensed professional, a lawyer.

The application form is not a bureaucratic-form-competency test. IRCC does not play Gotcha-Games. IRCC is well aware that people make mistakes, including incidentally omitting information. We all make mistakes. Those who are confident they made no mistakes are making the big mistake of denying they did.

Not being an expert, I cannot for-sure assure you that this is no problem, but that is my guess. Especially if it relates to a document outside your eligibility period.

I even doubt this would be the subject of questions during an interview.

IRCC officials are a lot better at sorting things out, in context, than many here give them credit. The citizenship agents and officers almost all have extensive experience dealing with HUNDREDS of individuals in a wide, wide range of circumstances. They can discern unintended omissions from overt efforts to deceive or conceal information, again a lot better than many give them credit.

An unintended omission is not misrepresentation. In contrast, failing to truthfully report where one lives, one's residential address, can hardly be considered an unintended omission, especially for an applicant who has not just moved across town or to a new province, but out of the country. No advance degrees in neuroscience necessary to get the difference.

BEST GUESS: NO CAUSE to worry.

Good luck.

 

[RJ2020]

I am NOT an expert and I am especially NOT qualified to give personal advice. Moreover, this forum is NOT an appropriate place to get advice. For advice, consult with a properly licensed professional, a lawyer.

The application form is not a bureaucratic-form-competency test. IRCC does not play Gotcha-Games. IRCC is well aware that people make mistakes, including incidentally omitting information. We all make mistakes. Those who are confident they made no mistakes are making the big mistake of denying they did.

Not being an expert, I cannot for-sure assure you that this is no problem, but that is my guess. Especially if it relates to a document outside your eligibility period.

I even doubt this would be the subject of questions during an interview.

IRCC officials are a lot better at sorting things out, in context, than many here give them credit. The citizenship agents and officers almost all have extensive experience dealing with HUNDREDS of individuals in a wide, wide range of circumstances. They can discern unintended omissions from overt efforts to deceive or conceal information, again a lot better than many give them credit.

BEST GUESS: NO CAUSE to worry.

Good luck.

Thanks so much for your reply and time. I appreciate it.

What I'm really confused about is that in the instruction guide, IRCC specifically has mentioned this:

"Tell us if you have had immigration, permanent resident status and/or citizenship in any other country outside of Canada (e.g. your country of birth)

• Check either yes or no.
• If you check yes, complete the chart.
• Tell us which countries you have held status in, and exactly what status you held or currently hold (student, employment/worker, refugee/protected person, permanent resident or citizen).
• Date you obtained each status(YYYY-MM-DD)
• End date if no longer valid, if applicable (YYYY-MM-DD). Leave blank if you currently hold this status"

However, in the new application form, there is a drop down in which we can see "visitor".

So, do you think I had to refer to the instruction guide or to the form itself? because I was really confused while filling the form, and finally referred to the instruction guide and did not see "Visitor" in the instruction guide. I also thought that this line (student, employment/worker, refugee/protected person, permanent resident or citizen) might be some examples of immigration or citizenship statuses, but after that, I noticed that there is no term like "for example" before them. So, I assumed that those statuses are all statuses that are considered as an immigration status.

So, in your opinion, do you think they might have simply forgot to update the instruction guide? or they expect us to refer to the form itself? because if there is an instruction guide, shouldn't we refer to that to fill the form? I'm really confused about it.

 

[dpenabill]

Thanks so much for your reply and time. I appreciate it.

What I'm really confused about is that in the instruction guide, IRCC specifically has mentioned this:

"Tell us if you have had immigration, permanent resident status and/or citizenship in any other country outside of Canada (e.g. your country of birth)

• Check either yes or no.
• If you check yes, complete the chart.
• Tell us which countries you have held status in, and exactly what status you held or currently hold (student, employment/worker, refugee/protected person, permanent resident or citizen).
• Date you obtained each status(YYYY-MM-DD)
• End date if no longer valid, if applicable (YYYY-MM-DD). Leave blank if you currently hold this status"

However, in the new application form, there is a drop down in which we can see "visitor".

So, do you think I had to refer to the instruction guide or to the form itself? because I was really confused while filling the form, and finally referred to the instruction guide and did not see "Visitor" in the instruction guide. I also thought that this line (student, employment/worker, refugee/protected person, permanent resident or citizen) might be some examples of immigration or citizenship statuses, but after that, I noticed that there is no term like "for example" before them. So, I assumed that those statuses are all statuses that are considered as an immigration status.

So, in your opinion, do you think they might have simply forgot to update the instruction guide? or they expect us to refer to the form itself? because if there is an instruction guide, shouldn't we refer to that to fill the form? I'm really confused about it.

I have not examined the forms and instructions closely in regards to this, and I do not currently have time to drill into it much.

From time to time there are minor wrinkles in the guide, instructions, and forms, which usually do not pose a significant let alone serious problem. There have been a few occasions over the years in which this or that inconsistency or uncertainty has posed a bit of an issue for some, just some. But even on those occasions (noting I doubt this is one that involves much risk of an issue) IRCC was typically very good in sorting out what mattered and what did not.

Those experienced in these things realize that "status" encompasses the full gambit. So the reference to student and all is illustrative, not exhaustive. But IRCC is well aware they are mostly dealing with large numbers of individuals not that experienced nor that sophisticated in these matters. They really do get it and they really do put things in perspective.

So if you were hiding something, well, yeah, that goes down that fork in the road with perils. If you were not hiding anything, odds are very, very high (far better than roulette wheel odds) all is well.

It is oft times difficult to maintain a balance in discussing these things because the tipping points are excruciatingly difficult to clearly illuminate. That said, the scenario you describe does not look problematic. Worst case scenario, my GUESS, is a question during an interview, to which you just simply, honestly, describe what and why in your own terms, as you understood things, and that should be the end of it . . . unless, for example, there are other aspects of your case raising questions.