19 months application/stuck in security check/background
- Thread starter MS2017
- Start date
False. A Mandamus can be used in cases where security check is taking too long without a reasonable explanation. It is best to consult with a lawyer, a quick google search of lawyer with mandamus experience will give you a list, and they will give you the best advice as to how long before you'd want to file or if it is worth filing.
Usually, people can't stop the question at "can we go the mandamus route?"
Many, when stuck at IRCC level (and not a third party), have their lawyer make the educated guess that a nudge in the right direction, aka the letter of demand, would be enough for IRCC to just put the application on top of the pile without having to file a leave application at the federal court. In many cases, it happens to be applications which were already relatively close to finalization, but now with an oath a month instead of 4 months later...
Security concerns may go a different way, if there's a good reason it's taking time, well, see you in court, and the applicant better be ready to pay thousands of dollars if it goes well, or possibly lose the case and also pay IRCC's legal fees.
A qualified lawyer should be able to clarify all this to the applicant, based on the specifics of the application (so, during a paid appointment, not some free consultation!), and then, up to OP I guess...
Many, when stuck at IRCC level (and not a third party), have their lawyer make the educated guess that a nudge in the right direction, aka the letter of demand, would be enough for IRCC to just put the application on top of the pile without having to file a leave application at the federal court. In many cases, it happens to be applications which were already relatively close to finalization, but now with an oath a month instead of 4 months later...
Security concerns may go a different way, if there's a good reason it's taking time, well, see you in court, and the applicant better be ready to pay thousands of dollars if it goes well, or possibly lose the case and also pay IRCC's legal fees.
A qualified lawyer should be able to clarify all this to the applicant, based on the specifics of the application (so, during a paid appointment, not some free consultation!), and then, up to OP I guess...
Also, worth adding to the decision making process : the time it would take before a potential hearing. We're speaking months here, and potentially more than a year.
Cf this recent article from CBC : https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/federal-courts-immigration-filings-1.7402924
So yeah, apart from the thousands of dollars, the applicant should also understand that, maybe, their application has a good chance to being finalized in the next year or year and a half, before a potential hearing, in which case the points of the hearing becomes moot but the money is gone. Mandamus has to be seen as a relief for exceptional cases, and there have been such cases where applicants wait for 10, 15 years or even more for their application. Unless there's very good reason to think the one year and a half current processing will become years and years with no resolution in sight, better be careful before literally throwing serious money in the trash can.
The vast majority of "mandamus success stories" in the forum were not actual mandamus cases, and people (rightfully so! ) don't disclose their personal details here for stuff that ends up in Canlii.
Not saying all of this to discourage OP or dismiss his situation, after all, a family member of mine is also stuck in security checks for a year an a half or so and it pisses me off, but yeah, lawyering up territory shouldn't be taken lightly, and definitely shouldn't be taken based on what can be seen on a forum, this comment included.
Cf this recent article from CBC : https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/federal-courts-immigration-filings-1.7402924
So yeah, apart from the thousands of dollars, the applicant should also understand that, maybe, their application has a good chance to being finalized in the next year or year and a half, before a potential hearing, in which case the points of the hearing becomes moot but the money is gone. Mandamus has to be seen as a relief for exceptional cases, and there have been such cases where applicants wait for 10, 15 years or even more for their application. Unless there's very good reason to think the one year and a half current processing will become years and years with no resolution in sight, better be careful before literally throwing serious money in the trash can.
The vast majority of "mandamus success stories" in the forum were not actual mandamus cases, and people (rightfully so! ) don't disclose their personal details here for stuff that ends up in Canlii.
Not saying all of this to discourage OP or dismiss his situation, after all, a family member of mine is also stuck in security checks for a year an a half or so and it pisses me off, but yeah, lawyering up territory shouldn't be taken lightly, and definitely shouldn't be taken based on what can be seen on a forum, this comment included.
Why would an application take 10 years? What in the world could take IRCC or it's partners to verify in 10 years? There's no reason for an application or whatever kind of screening to take more than 2 years. This in itself is a sign of laziness on the part of IRCC. I would advise the OP to use the mandamus route. There's absolutely no justification for an application to take 2 years to process. No reason whatsoever!
Only instances I'm aware of where it's taken that long (10+ years) were ones involving refugees later accused of reavailment (see https://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/threads/refugee-status-cessation-and-prs-applying-for-citizenship.333455/ ) - in these it looks to me like IRCC may have been dragging their feet to start a reavailment case, until pushed to start these proceedings in response to mandamus proceedings.
Curious to learn if there are other cases where the delays were for different reasons.
Perhaps random security screening where a foreign gov't became uncooperative...?