The fact that citizenship applicants cannot be relied on to be 100% accurate and complete (even if they are generally being truthful, let alone when they aren't) is actually a significant factor in precisely why, since 2019, IRCC has required citizenship applicants include a full copy of all pages of the applicant's passport(s) to make a complete application . . . notwithstanding that during this period of time the capacity of CBSA to capture, store, and facilitate access to an individual PR's travel history has increased.
The question some might want to consider is why, given developments in technology and international information-sharing that have enhanced the CBSA's record keeping capabilities, did IRCC implement this 2019 change, in effect promoting the importance of providing IRCC a copy of passports that includes passport stamps?
Overall: since 2019, providing IRCC access to examine the applicant's passport stamps is a required part of making an application for citizenship. It helps to understand why, but for purposes of understanding what the instructions mean, just the fact that this has been added to the process sufficiently illuminates that YES, IRCC considers the information in passport stamps important enough to now require copies of them.
. . . with all due respect, I completely disagree with "Rather, IRCC relies on the best source of information for a particular PR's travel history: the PR, the person applying for citizenship. That person is the ONE and ONLY person or entity in the whole world who was FOR SURE there each and every time the PR exited Canada, each and every time the PR entered Canada, for sure capable of capturing and keeping a record of every exit, every entry. The PR, the citizenship applicant is the ONE BEST SOURCE of travel history information."
I disagree with this because this assumes that the PR is always 100% truthful in what he/she reports. Which is actually far from the truth. The best source of information (not 100% but greater than the PR) is still the CBSA.
I have used "
best source" in relation to the capacity to capture and retain information, not in relation to the how reliable an applicant is in reporting that information. In particular . . .
Regarding capturing data: Best source is the source that has the fullest capacity to both completely and accurately capture the relevant data. For dates of exit from and entry into Canada, there is ONLY source which for sure can capture a complete and accurate record, and that source is the individual traveler, which in this context is the PR.
Consider: if there is no guarantee that CBSA can capture a record 100% of the times a PR exited or entered Canada (and it for sure cannot), how can that be better than a source which was for sure present each and every time the PR exited and entered Canada, 100% of the time?
Regarding reporting data: The fact that the BEST SOURCE (as in most complete and accurate) might NOT be a reliable
reporter of that information is something different.
And, indeed, the latter is largely the point underlying why IRCC now requires copies of pages containing passport stamps with the application: so it can better evaluate the extent to which the best source of travel history can be relied on to be an accurate and complete reporter of this information.
IRCC clearly makes
NO assumption that a PR/applicant for citizenship is truthful, let alone 100% truthful. Moreover, importantly, even when the applicant is perceived to be
truthful, it is readily understood the applicant's version might not be entirely accurate. In fact, at the very least IRCC recognizes everyone makes mistakes, and if there is any assumption about how reliable the applicant's information is, it is probable there is an informal assumption the applicant's account is not likely to be 100% accurate.
Thus, in particular, the primary process of verifying the applicant met the physical presence requirement is largely focused on determining the extent to which the applicant's declarations of travel history can be relied on to be an accurate reporting of the facts. Note: if and when it is perceived the applicant's declaration of travel history cannot be relied on, the process of verifying physical presence no longer focuses on travel history but rather focuses on evidence of actual presence in Canada, proof of presence during all those days purportedly in Canada following known dates of entry.
As a routine part of processing EVERY application for citizenship, the primary process involves considering, comparing, and contrasting the applicant's declared travel history in context with a range of other information, not the least of which is the applicant's address and activity/work history (which must be provided for the full eligibility period with
NO gaps . . . even though there is no work-related requirement at all) and (most likely) the CBSA records of entries for the applicant (at least until recently, internal IRCC information is still indicating routine processing looks at CBSA records for ENTRY dates, not exit data, even though the latter can be accessed -- and likely this is done in the event there is a more formal investigation of the applicant's physical presence).
It warrants emphasizing the role CBSA records have in this process because there are, indeed, many who misunderstand how IRCC uses that information. Even though IRCC could rely MORE on CBSA records, IRCC uses these records to see if the CBSA travel history reveals any omissions or inaccuracies in the applicant's version. It uses the CBSA history to determine if it can rely on the PR/applicant's account. It uses the CBSA history to determine if it can rely on the best source . . . and if not,
that's when things go south.
And make no mistake: even though minor discrepancies will not cause a problem (at least not for an applicant applying with a margin sufficient to cover minor errors), if IRCC has concerns the applicant's account cannot be relied on to be complete and accurate, that's when things tend to go
off-the-rails into full blown presence case territory. It makes a big difference, and is a BIG deal, if the best source of information cannot be relied on. We no longer see a whole lot of these cases (there are multiple reasons for this), but if and when the applicant is perceived to be an unreliable reporter of the facts, even if no overt dishonesty is suspected, things do not go well. No applicant wants to go there.
While other information figures more prominently in the physical presence assessment, passport stamps in the applicant's passport(s) are often examined and considered. Again, so much so, in fact, that in 2019 IRCC revised what must be submitted with the application in order to make a complete application, adding that copies of all the pages in the applicant's passport(s) MUST be submitted. Prior to 2019 (and when I applied for example), applicants only needed to submit copies of passport bio-pages with the application.
Bottom-Line: For purposes of verifying the applicant met the physical presence requirement, the key factor is whether or not IRCC can rely on the best source of travel history information to also be an accurate and complete REPORTER of that information. And among other things looked at, for this, IRCC often examines the stamps in the applicant's passport(s).
