Shubhrak said:
Hi all,
I met an immigration lawyer specializing in Canada yesterday, to clear my doubts about crossing into Canada using an expired PR Card. (My PR Card expired in 2013 and I have not fulfilled my residency obligations.) This is what she said:
1. It is not true that the border officials at Niagara have no authority to keep you from entering Canada. She said hundreds of people are being denied entry through the bridge, and the Canada Border Services Agency has now been given more teeth.
2. It might be better to try and cross over into Vancouver from the US, since officers there are "cooler." She cited her own example--recently, an officer waved her into Vancouver only upon showing her driving license, and did not ask for PR Card at all. Having said that, she still felt that my chances are bleak.
3. It does matter that my PR Card expired in 2013: it has been way too long, and she feels they will grill me severely and probably deny me entry.
I thought to share this with you, so it might help/inform others in my situation.
I tend to agree with
zardoz that there is something at least a bit off regarding this "immigration lawyer specializing in Canada."
Note:
zardoz was citing the enforcement manual and the relevant statutory provision (IRPA section 19) relative to what those say regarding individuals with
Permanent Resident status.
A PR who establishes identity and status at the POE is
entitled to enter Canada. Proof of identity will, in most cases, establish status as well, assuming the proof of identity is a passport, which will connect the traveler to the traveler's CIC client number. Moreover, the expired PR card will likewise link the individual to the individual's status in the system.
It is undoubtedly correct that many of the POE are turning back travelers.
BUT NOT Canadian PRs.
I do not know if there is a comparable offence in Canada, but in the U.S. it is explicitly a criminal offence to choose a particular border crossing expecting it to be easier or such. At the least, if the Canadian border officers suspect POE shopping, that is almost certain to raise questions and make the encounter far more difficult. It is, in any event, my sense is that at the least the kind of advice offered by this lawyer was
unethical for a lawyer.
Of course it matters that the PR card expired, and how long ago it expired. That is a big clue as to whether or not an individual PR has been living in Canada. Indeed, the PR who is abroad and does not have a currently valid PR card in possession, is
presumed to not have valid status. Thus, when applying for a PR Travel Document from abroad, it is critical to document and in many cases submit sufficient evidence to prove compliance with the PR Residency Obligation.
This is why those PRs abroad with an expired PR card and either in breach of the PR RO or cutting it close to being in breach, will often attempt to travel to Canada via the U.S., using private transportation to approach the border. At the border, the PR is no longer "abroad," and all the PR has to do is establish identity sufficient to also show status, and that will entitle the PR entry into Canada.
But it will not guarantee there will be no 44(1) Report or Removal Order issued.
And these days, a PR in breach of the PR RO and whose PR card is expired, particularly if expired for a significant amount of time, is indeed at high risk for being thoroughly scrutinized (
grilled severely) when attempting to enter Canada . . . regardless of which POE is used.
But they
cannot deny entry. They can issue the 44(1) Report (which in the circumstances you describe, seems likely unless you have strong H&C reasons for not returning to Canada sooner) and immediately also issue the Removal Order, if they conclude you are in breach of the PR RO. The Removal Order is
NOT enforceable at that stage, not for 30 days, and not for longer than that if you appeal.
By the way, the trend is steadily toward both more teeth and stricter enforcement at the border. Which is why the risk is so high there will be a residency examination and, for the PR clearly in breach of the PR RO, the issuance of the 44{1) Report (of inadmissibility due to breach of PR RO) followed by the Removal Order. But the PR still gets into Canada. A PR is, after all, a
Canadian (IRPA distinguishes Canadian citizens and Canadian PRs apart from all others, who are Foreign Nationals).
and ditto
keesio as well.
