To clarify, background includes both criminality and security? Is that what you are saying? If yes, what is the point of the prohibitions check?
Applicants waiting for more than 2 years interested in Mandamus with a firm as a group meet here !!!
- Thread starter luvtrump
- Start date
The prohibitions is a check on whether the applicant has violated the relevant provisions of the Canadian Citizenship Act (C-6) that prevent the grant of citizenship.
Got it, as I understand it now, background check includes criminality and security screening. Don't know why my test invite is delayed, very frustrating.
Not sure how or why this topic went in the direction of prohibitions and background screening, but so it goes.
OTHERWISE:
I am not sure what "Background check complete" means, but I know what it does not mean. Even if that (completed) is indicated, there will ALWAYS be at least one more background check, at the very least the GCMS background check before the oath is scheduled, and that check includes, at the least, not just screening of immigration information (like whether the applicant has been issued a Removal Order at a Port-of-Entry when returning to Canada, or has a PR card application pending, or such), but a name-records check for criminality based on, at the least, name-record database information derived from RCMP and U.S. NCIC (FBI) databases.
Likewise for scheduling a test, an interview, or prior to taking any other action on an application, that requires such a GCMS background check (last I saw internal memos about this, in response to ATI applications, a GCMS background check is mandated each and every time any action is taken on a citizenship application).
If (again I am not sure), if "Background check complete" means that the formal RCMP and CSIS clearances have been completed (this is what I suspect, but do not know for sure, it means), that does not mean much. Frankly, anyone who will not readily pass that screening quite likely has, at the least, some serious issues lurking, pushing their application toward non-routine processing and increased odds of lengthy delays.
I suspect that "Background check complete" does NOT mean the processing agent handling the application has fully assessed the applicant's information, especially as to meeting the physical presence requirement. So, here too, if this is indicated "complete," that does not preclude a referral to CBSA for a background investigation (just for example, if the processing agent has questions about physical presence; investigations such as this I believe are typically done by CBSA's NSSD).
All that said, for the VAST MAJORITY of QUALIFIED applicants, all these checks are largely perfunctory, no questions looming, no issues raised, no doubts diverting the processing into the realm of more serious non-routine processing. While Finger Print requests, and some other very specific requests for information or documents, technically mean non-routine processing, those are not typically problematic and do not cause lengthy delays; in contrast, substantive questions about whether the applicant has a security issue, or has not met the physical presence requirement, tend to be serious and often cause significant delays and can cause lengthy delays.
OVERALL . . . not time yet to apprehend anything problematic . . . UNLESS you know of some reason why there might be questions, concerns, issues. While many protest to the contrary, the vast, vast majority of applicants encountering inordinate delays (compared to qualified applicants applying around the same time) either know or should know they are at risk for serious non-routine processing and know why.
The Citizenship Act is here: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-29/page-1.html
Particular requirements to qualify for a grant of citizenship, those prescribed in Section 5(1) of the Citizenship Act in particular, are here: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-29/page-2.html#docCont
Particular prohibitions (conditions which mean a person cannot be granted citizenship) are specified, in the Citizenship Act, in Section 22, which is here: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-29/page-5.html#docCont
Most of the prohibitions are NOT based on any violation of the Citizenship Act, but due to criminality or security issues, misrepresentation to IRCC, enforcement of immigration laws (including the PR Residency Obligation). While it is actually a little broader than what will actually constitute a prohibition, perhaps the best, most illuminating list of what is considered by IRCC in evaluating whether the applicant is subject to a "prohibition," is the list of questions under item 16 in the application itself. A "yes" answer to those questions does not necessarily mean the PR is subject to a prohibition, but most of them do, and the others depend on the particular details -- for example, one of these questions asks the applicant if they have ever been under a removal order, and some will need to answer yes but if it was one in the past and fully resolved, it does not constitute a prohibition.
Prohibitions are also something that are checked more than once. Even if the applicant's record or tracker indicates that prohibitions are "completed," this is something that can be (and in more than a few cases is) reviewed again, and indeed, typically applicants will be required to verify there are no prohibitions just before they take the oath. Remember, a driving while impaired or domestic assault charge the night before the oath will mean being prohibited from taking the oath.
Not anywhere near time to apprehend a lengthy delay. In regards to this: "most people get their test invite within 2 days of their background clearance," I very much doubt that is close to accurate. In any event, timelines can and do vary for a wide, wide range of reasons. A month signals nothing.
OTHERWISE:
I am not sure what "Background check complete" means, but I know what it does not mean. Even if that (completed) is indicated, there will ALWAYS be at least one more background check, at the very least the GCMS background check before the oath is scheduled, and that check includes, at the least, not just screening of immigration information (like whether the applicant has been issued a Removal Order at a Port-of-Entry when returning to Canada, or has a PR card application pending, or such), but a name-records check for criminality based on, at the least, name-record database information derived from RCMP and U.S. NCIC (FBI) databases.
Likewise for scheduling a test, an interview, or prior to taking any other action on an application, that requires such a GCMS background check (last I saw internal memos about this, in response to ATI applications, a GCMS background check is mandated each and every time any action is taken on a citizenship application).
If (again I am not sure), if "Background check complete" means that the formal RCMP and CSIS clearances have been completed (this is what I suspect, but do not know for sure, it means), that does not mean much. Frankly, anyone who will not readily pass that screening quite likely has, at the least, some serious issues lurking, pushing their application toward non-routine processing and increased odds of lengthy delays.
I suspect that "Background check complete" does NOT mean the processing agent handling the application has fully assessed the applicant's information, especially as to meeting the physical presence requirement. So, here too, if this is indicated "complete," that does not preclude a referral to CBSA for a background investigation (just for example, if the processing agent has questions about physical presence; investigations such as this I believe are typically done by CBSA's NSSD).
All that said, for the VAST MAJORITY of QUALIFIED applicants, all these checks are largely perfunctory, no questions looming, no issues raised, no doubts diverting the processing into the realm of more serious non-routine processing. While Finger Print requests, and some other very specific requests for information or documents, technically mean non-routine processing, those are not typically problematic and do not cause lengthy delays; in contrast, substantive questions about whether the applicant has a security issue, or has not met the physical presence requirement, tend to be serious and often cause significant delays and can cause lengthy delays.
OVERALL . . . not time yet to apprehend anything problematic . . . UNLESS you know of some reason why there might be questions, concerns, issues. While many protest to the contrary, the vast, vast majority of applicants encountering inordinate delays (compared to qualified applicants applying around the same time) either know or should know they are at risk for serious non-routine processing and know why.
Not sure what you mean. Note that "C-6" in reference to an Act of law in Canada in regards to Citizenship must be referencing a particular bill before parliament, in a particular session of parliament, which would ONLY constitute amendments to the Citizenship Act, which has been amended by many different bills in parliament over the years. That is, "C-6" would be just one of those legislative bills (I suspect you are referring to the bill adopted in 2017 which implemented some major changes, repealing things like the "intent to continue residing in Canada" requirement, revising the physical presence requirement to a 3/5 rule, with up to a year's credit for pre-PR days in Canada, among other big changes).
The Citizenship Act is here: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-29/page-1.html
Particular requirements to qualify for a grant of citizenship, those prescribed in Section 5(1) of the Citizenship Act in particular, are here: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-29/page-2.html#docCont
Particular prohibitions (conditions which mean a person cannot be granted citizenship) are specified, in the Citizenship Act, in Section 22, which is here: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-29/page-5.html#docCont
Most of the prohibitions are NOT based on any violation of the Citizenship Act, but due to criminality or security issues, misrepresentation to IRCC, enforcement of immigration laws (including the PR Residency Obligation). While it is actually a little broader than what will actually constitute a prohibition, perhaps the best, most illuminating list of what is considered by IRCC in evaluating whether the applicant is subject to a "prohibition," is the list of questions under item 16 in the application itself. A "yes" answer to those questions does not necessarily mean the PR is subject to a prohibition, but most of them do, and the others depend on the particular details -- for example, one of these questions asks the applicant if they have ever been under a removal order, and some will need to answer yes but if it was one in the past and fully resolved, it does not constitute a prohibition.
Prohibitions are also something that are checked more than once. Even if the applicant's record or tracker indicates that prohibitions are "completed," this is something that can be (and in more than a few cases is) reviewed again, and indeed, typically applicants will be required to verify there are no prohibitions just before they take the oath. Remember, a driving while impaired or domestic assault charge the night before the oath will mean being prohibited from taking the oath.
When I say background completed, I simply mean my citizenship application status for background verification shows up as completed and is in the colour green. If you review this forum's citizenship trackers segregated by month of application in year 2023, people receiving their test invite on the day of or two days after their notification that background verification has completed is a common theme.
I arrived in Canada from the Middle East as a 17 year old and a number of my high school classmates did as well and some of us were sent for enhanced security screening during our PR processing. This caused our PR application processing to take much longer than the 6 months standard processing time at that time. We all got our PRs (we are all a harmless bunch working in pharma or tech, who love being here, and nothing else would have made any sense as we were all eligible for our PRs), however, it was an especially stressful time for us as we all arrived here as international students at Universities and had established lives in Canada when we had applied for PR under the Canadian Experience Class. This experience has caused me to worry about the potential for similar delays during my citizenship processing, the reason behind why I have posted this question.
Thank you for your feedback.
Last edited:
So, my saga is finally over.
I applied in June 2021, started getting very concerned about no progress for a year this February, and tried to get any substantial update from IRCC. I tried all means: calls, webforms, MP, ordering GCMS notes.
In early June I gave up and filed mandamus; my file started moving right away, and I had an oath within 2 months.
During that time my PR card also expired, and the new card only arrived after I had the oath scheduled, also with a major delay in processing.
I should be able to pick up my passport on Monday.
I went with https://atimmigrationlaw.com/ for mandamus, very happy with their work. I feel that mandamus was worth every penny
I applied in June 2021, started getting very concerned about no progress for a year this February, and tried to get any substantial update from IRCC. I tried all means: calls, webforms, MP, ordering GCMS notes.
In early June I gave up and filed mandamus; my file started moving right away, and I had an oath within 2 months.
During that time my PR card also expired, and the new card only arrived after I had the oath scheduled, also with a major delay in processing.
I should be able to pick up my passport on Monday.
I went with https://atimmigrationlaw.com/ for mandamus, very happy with their work. I feel that mandamus was worth every penny
Reviving this thread for anyone who wants to apply for Mandamus. We can do group discount and more power as a group. Anyone is reaching 17 month or more time mark?
Congrats!!So, my saga is finally over.
I applied in June 2021, started getting very concerned about no progress for a year this February, and tried to get any substantial update from IRCC. I tried all means: calls, webforms, MP, ordering GCMS notes.
In early June I gave up and filed mandamus; my file started moving right away, and I had an oath within 2 months.
During that time my PR card also expired, and the new card only arrived after I had the oath scheduled, also with a major delay in processing.
I should be able to pick up my passport on Monday.
I went with https://atimmigrationlaw.com/ for mandamus, very happy with their work. I feel that mandamus was worth every penny
If I may ask, did you end up perfecting records? Did judge issue orders to IRCC to make decision on your application? Or did IRCC move on your application after the threat letter from lawyer?
Thanks
For me the threat letter only resulted in language and presence being completed, prohibitions were still in progress. About a month later we did the perfection stage, and IRCC chose to schedule the oath 1 day before the 30 days deadline for a response from DOJ, and asked us to withdraw the mandamus.
2 years plus for my PR
I got my ATIP and it has no update (my police report and all are cleared)
I cant with this delay I moved here in 2017, it took them 2 years plus to accept me as a protected person (knowing that my file was always completed and never missed a document) then I applied for my PR and it's more than 2 years.
I just can't anymore...I got even rejected from jobs because I am not a permanent resident.
I am ready to join any group for Writ Mandamus process
Greetings everyone, Hoping to get an explanation of my situation. PR file stuck in background check since Feb 2023. I got an ADR in December and my CBSA notes from then mention that my security was comprehensive. It was canceled and restarted again in mid-December. There have been no updates since then. Just got CSIS notes for the first time and it states that no personal info regarding myself was located. This confuses me since I thought comprehensive checks were done by CSIS. Can anyone here give me any insights? TIA