Asked for Police Certificate for a Country ,I did not spend 183 days in?

[johnjkjk]

I'm not an expert but to add something that may of interest:
- there could be any reason for the request which you cannot challenge as IRCC is obligated to verify prohibitions: which trumps any general guidelines such as 183 days which you are insisting on repeatedly.
- if you're concerned about the extra time impact, fighting with IRCC would waste the same or more amount of time
- PCC isn't a major issue. To fight it could raise red flags with IRCC, and they could in the worst case request in-depth security screening (and correspondence from the concerned foreign government could be very slow), potentially adding years to the application
- if it was so severely delayed and it went to mandamus, IRCC would argue that the applicant didn't do all that was required of them in a timely manner and that they have certain obligations
-bottom line, your application has been delayed and is technically non routine due to the additional information request. The shortest way forward would be to get the PCC and ask IRCC for more time to provide it.
- you should be thankful that you've got the request. It means that your file is being looked at. It's not lost in a black hole.

 

[DSEuro78]

"it is possible that IRCC will put an application on-the-shelf, so to say, until a PCC is received, unless IRCC concludes the applicant cannot reasonably be expected to provide a PCC. In particular, one of the options, and as I have otherwise noted perhaps the most appropriate approach for @MEB, the OP here, is to respond to the request with an explanation saying they cannot provide a police certificate within the time specified in the request, but that they have initiated the process for obtaining a PCC and will submit it when it becomes available. And, again, this might result in the application being put on-the-shelf, so to say, until a PCC is received."

Exactly this. I said the same in my earlier posts. J

OP - Just get the PCC ordered, inform IRCC that the PCC has long lead times and provide proof you have applied for the PCC and wait it out. You never know, it might arrive before the deadline. If not, contact IRCC again and inform them. They might continue to process your application whilst waiting.

 

[MEB]

More comments, and again for clarity I am rewinding a bit, revisiting and addressing the primary issue.



Additional General Observations:

Acknowledgement: There is no doubt that individuals can be at a disadvantage due to their circumstances, including circumstances that are totally outside their control, and circumstances which do not in any way affect the individual's eligibility for citizenship ("innocent circumstances," one might say). This is true generally; being born into poverty, for example, tends repress a person's opportunities for a long time, if not life. And also, in some cases, particularly; yes, living or working in certain parts of the world before coming to Canada to live can influence how things go in a citizenship application, not in terms of whether the individual is eligible for citizenship and thus not itself something that will dictate whether citizenship will be granted, but in terms of how complicated and long the process might take.

The unfairness inherent in such situations, affecting some individuals, is outside the scope of procedural fairness in processing citizenship applications, and thus there is minimal (if any) recourse for the particular individual. At the risk of sounding callous (though I wish not to; I get why this is a sore point, a very sore point, for so many), this tends to fall under the when-life-is-unfair umbrella. (Also note, again, the low priority given delays in the processing timeline, discussed in my previous post.)

Of course such unfairness can be cause for advocating changes to the law and procedures, pushing for changes that will at least reduce if not eliminate the deleterious impact that results from otherwise innocent circumstances. The efficacy of such advocacy depends on the particulars. It is clear that obtaining a PCC from certain countries can and does impose additional hurdles, and potential delays, affecting certain individuals more, and in some contexts disproportionately so. I generally do not wrestle much with how-things-should-work issues, but it appears to me that IRCC and Parliament generally (not just under the current government) is well-acquainted with issues related to PCCs, including difficulties arising in relation to certain countries, and that consequently there is, probably, not much likelihood the government will be persuaded to change current policies and practices, not by much anyway. (My impression is that personal relief is probably allowed on a case-by-case basis.)

It is not likely it will help to address this, the unfairness or how things should work, in a response to a request for additional documents. The better response to a request for documents is, usually, one that is simple, direct, and brief. Bureaucrats tend to have a narrow focus, at least in regards to doing their job, and any information that is a distraction or is complicated risks causing confusion, even mistakes.

Proactive, Pre-emptive Preparation: (Too late to help @MEB.) The discussion here illuminates another element prospective citizenship applicants would be prudent to consider BEFORE they make the application for citizenship. A lot of the discussions in this forum are about meeting the requirements and applying. A few regular participants, including me, are often reminding others that there are other factors to consider in deciding WHEN to apply. For example, I am a big proponent of considering waiting significantly longer, after reaching the minimum eligibility threshold, BEFORE applying, to build not just a few days margin but a bigger margin, and for SOME it is best to wait considerably longer (I waited for a full extra year, given my business with ties abroad).

I have also often mentioned that prospective applicants with significant ties abroad, and particularly those who were living and working outside Canada for an extended period of time within the four years previous to the date they make the application, should consider going through the process of obtaining a PCC from such countries EVEN THOUGH they are not required to include one with the application itself. Just in case they are asked for one, so they can provide it to IRCC quicker, reducing delays.

The situation illustrated by @MEB suggests that this would be a good idea for applicants who have spent a considerable amount of time in a country for which obtaining a PCC is more difficult or subject to a lengthy timeline (and especially so if much of that time there has been within the previous four years). To be prepared. That said, I recognize some countries require someone applying for a PCC to document an official reason showing the PCC is needed.

@dpenabill ,As usual an objective, constructive and content-rich input...thanks for taking from your time to extend your feedback!

As I already mentioned, fairness topic and discussion of the process defects in the PCC area, is not related to the action I took on the same day of the ADR, which didn't include any finger pointing /criticism to the process ,as I needed to act practically and efficiently by replying in 3 distinct aspects :

1)Why I cannot respond timely to the ADR(as main objective of the LOE): includes supporting letter from the embassy that this could take 4 months(from the time all paperwork is ready on their desk) and illustrating that my experience shows this time frame is normal and may be really extended due to cultural aspects(Holy month +EID period)

2)Section to clarify claims in the ADR body :(Spent more than 183 days +did not submit justification for not submitting a PCC):Showing through exact dates and snaps from the process flows in the form why this is incorrect +not applicable(but choosing the appropriate words to describe that!)

3)Due diligence and further supporting documents :By providing formal letter from Embassy +previous timeline for obtaining the PCC while being a resident in the country +such previous PCC itself covering the majority of my residency in such country.

In parallel to all this I am trying to explore other methods of obtaining such PCC in less than 4 months (although it may cost more than 25 times the embassy's method, which is not cheap by the way in the first place!),but till now it do not appear to be worth it time or money wise...but this is another story and got nothing to do with the associated process discussion or my provided LOE.

Bregards
MEB

 

[MEB]

PCC from which GCC country have they asked for ?

Hi @abbas.pasha ,
Thanks for your advise and valuable insights provided through private messages ,really appreciated !

 

[abbas.pasha]

Hi @abbas.pasha ,
Thanks for your advise and valuable insights provided through private messages ,really appreciated !

Hope things get resolved soon..

 

[MEB]

@dpenabill @scylla @abbas.pasha
Further updates today by the way...

1)Received an automated message from IRCC :
"
We acknowledge receipt of the documents and wish to inform you that they have been added to the file. Please note, for technical reasons, they may not be visible in your online account. Rest assured that your supporting documents are indeed added and available for officer review.

· If your enquiry was solely to provide documents, please note this is the only response you will receive.

· If your enquiry included additional questions in addition to the documents, they will be addressed separately, as soon as possible."

- I guess this is just to confirm I just did not leave the ADR abounded and now I have to wait for a decision from the officer ,correct?

2)Re-approached the embassy to confirm process and time frames, and now I have a formal correspondence that this would take 4-6 months !As expected and mentioned here multiple times ,I guess this because the productivity falls to under 50 % within Ramadan +EID period ..and hence was sure these 4 months would be a minimum duration now ....

Do you think I need to update them with this new time frame ,or this may over complicate and extend the delay of reaching a decision ?Do I have to re-submit also my passport showing the final stamp while leaving such country for good which marks the last day used in the 183 days calculation (as this was a formal concern from IRCC in the ADR)?

 

[abbas.pasha]

@dpenabill @scylla @abbas.pasha
Further updates today by the way...

1)Received an automated message from IRCC :
"
We acknowledge receipt of the documents and wish to inform you that they have been added to the file. Please note, for technical reasons, they may not be visible in your online account. Rest assured that your supporting documents are indeed added and available for officer review.

· If your enquiry was solely to provide documents, please note this is the only response you will receive.

· If your enquiry included additional questions in addition to the documents, they will be addressed separately, as soon as possible."

- I guess this is just to confirm I just did not leave the ADR abounded and now I have to wait for a decision from the officer ,correct?

2)Re-approached the embassy to confirm process and time frames, and now I have a formal correspondence that this would take 4-6 months !As expected and mentioned here multiple times ,I guess this because the productivity falls to under 50 % within Ramadan +EID period ..and hence was sure these 4 months would be a minimum duration now ....

Do you think I need to update them with this new time frame ,or this may over complicate and extend the delay of reaching a decision ?Do I have to re-submit also my passport showing the final stamp while leaving such country for good which marks the last day used in the 183 days calculation (as this was a formal concern from IRCC in the ADR)?

I would suggest you share the formal correspondence that you received from the Embassy with IRCC...

 

[dpenabill]

Further updates today by the way...

1)Received an automated message from IRCC :

IRCC communications are full of boilerplate and all sorts information which might not be relevant to the particular applicant receiving it. Usually it is not difficult to sort through the notice or request and identify what is relevant to YOU in particular.

You have quoted from the original request for additional documents, for example, but it is likely (although this is for you to determine based on your case and the entirety of the request) the part relevant to you was simple and straight-forward:

-- submit a PCC from country XXX, or​

-- explain why you cannot provide a PCC​

That said, yes, sometimes the extra stuff (largely due to the way bureaucracies, but especially IRCC, employ templates in their communications) can be confusing. Not much an applicant can do but read and analyze the communication carefully, do their best to figure it out, as it applies to them, and respond accordingly.

Meanwhile, bureaucracies tend to operate according to a checklist and a decision-tree (or decision-schematic).

I think it might have been @johnjkjk who, above, more or less noted that there is little or nothing to be gained wrestling with IRCC over issues like these, which is all too true, and I will add that the anecdotal reporting tends to overwhelmingly illustrate that what works best is to keep it simple, provide what is requested, as requested, and stay out of the weeds. Whether one characterizes it as "arguing" or 'fighting" or "reasoning," there is generally no advantage gained by engaging with IRCC in such way. (With exceptions; always some exceptions -- sometimes there is necessary cause to challenge IRCC, but almost all applicants hope, or should hope, it never comes to that, because that would mean very lengthy delays and hurdles posing more than an inconvenience.)

Bureaucracy is what bureaucracy does. What bureaucracy does not do at all well is deal with complications or nuances.

Meanwhile, in terms of what to send IRCC, very often *more* is not better. Most often the better approach is to give what is asked for and that's it. (This too is subject to scores of exceptions, which is for the individuals involved to handle as best they can.)

The processing path your application is probably on, now, is either:

-- the application will proceed through the process (which may be subject to collateral actions to verify no prohibitions), or​

-- the application will be put on-the-shelf pending receipt of the PCC​

You probably cannot influence which of those paths it is on. Odds are you will suffer a significant delay. As noted, for IRCC delays do not cause much concern, not much at all. Which for many, a great many, is among the most frustrating aspects of this process.

 

[MEB]

IRCC communications are full of boilerplate and all sorts information which might not be relevant to the particular applicant receiving it. Usually it is not difficult to sort through the notice or request and identify what is relevant to YOU in particular.

You have quoted from the original request for additional documents, for example, but it is likely (although this is for you to determine based on your case and the entirety of the request) the part relevant to you was simple and straight-forward:

-- submit a PCC from country XXX, or​

-- explain why you cannot provide a PCC​

That said, yes, sometimes the extra stuff (largely due to the way bureaucracies, but especially IRCC, employ templates in their communications) can be confusing. Not much an applicant can do but read and analyze the communication carefully, do their best to figure it out, as it applies to them, and respond accordingly.

Meanwhile, bureaucracies tend to operate according to a checklist and a decision-tree (or decision-schematic).

I think it might have been @johnjkjk who, above, more or less noted that there is little or nothing to be gained wrestling with IRCC over issues like these, which is all too true, and I will add that the anecdotal reporting tends to overwhelmingly illustrate that what works best is to keep it simple, provide what is requested, as requested, and stay out of the weeds. Whether one characterizes it as "arguing" or 'fighting" or "reasoning," there is generally no advantage gained by engaging with IRCC in such way. (With exceptions; always some exceptions -- sometimes there is necessary cause to challenge IRCC, but almost all applicants hope, or should hope, it never comes to that, because that would mean very lengthy delays and hurdles posing more than an inconvenience.)

Bureaucracy is what bureaucracy does. What bureaucracy does not do at all well is deal with complications or nuances.

Meanwhile, in terms of what to send IRCC, very often *more* is not better. Most often the better approach is to give what is asked for and that's it. (This too is subject to scores of exceptions, which is for the individuals involved to handle as best they can.)

The processing path your application is probably on, now, is either:

-- the application will proceed through the process (which may be subject to collateral actions to verify no prohibitions), or​

-- the application will be put on-the-shelf pending receipt of the PCC​

You probably cannot influence which of those paths it is on. Odds are you will suffer a significant delay. As noted, for IRCC delays do not cause much concern, not much at all. Which for many, a great many, is among the most frustrating aspects of this process.

Thanks again @dpenabill ,but what about the new update from embassy that this would take 6 months (I also double-checked this on their formal site and it appears they formally updated it to 6 months there as well ,and totally removed the 4 month thing),in your opinion :

A)Do I have to inform them about such 50 % increase in maximum time frame(total time is now 3 times the standard IRCC ADRs time limit ,in general)?

B)Should I re-submit my passport scan showing exactly where the exit stamp from this country is ,just to" seal the deal "on this "183 days "claim they kept mentioning in the ADR(yes it may be a robotic message, yet still -apart from intentions & background thoughts -need to be addressed as it was a" formal" communication from IRCC and "formal body/reason "for the ADR title ?

 

[dpenabill]

Thanks again @dpenabill ,but what about the new update from embassy that this would take 6 months (I also double-checked this on their formal site and it appears they formally updated it to 6 months there as well ,and totally removed the 4 month thing),in your opinion :

A)Do I have to inform them about such 50 % increase in maximum time frame(total time is now 3 times the standard IRCC ADRs time limit ,in general)?

How you respond, what you communicate and submit, is really a very personal decision for YOU to make based on your best understanding.

While you have quoted significant parts of the communications you received, YOU are the one who needs to read and interpret them as best you can, and proceed accordingly. While I, like others here, can easily discern that they are asking for a PCC from country XXX, I cannot interpret what more they asked for and how to respond. Read the communications carefully, remembering there is typically extra stuff not applicable to you.

NOTE, for example, the reply you received from IRCC is, as you say, an "automated message." It references conditionals, like "If your enquiry . . . " was this or that. And yeah, this communication is probably little more than an acknowledgement of receipt of whatever you sent, and should in effect preclude a determination you failed to respond (and thus have not abandoned the application). My sense is you could have sent in a mess of gibberish and got this very same response, so it does not indicate anyone has actually read or considered the content of what you sent, not yet anyway.

I am not certain, but my strong impression is that the request YOU received is NOT dependent on whether you spent 183 days in a row in that country during the relevant four year time period. As many others, and I, have noted, these requests are not uncommon and can be for a variety of reasons. The reason for the request does not really matter once the request is made.

(Note: depending on how time abroad was accounted for in the physical presence calculator, for some applicants IRCC might infer presence in another country for 183 or more days even though a significant portion of that time was not actually in that country, and the applicant truthfully checked [No] for question 10.b in the application. And this could be what triggers the PCC request. By mistake, some will say. But once the request is made, it's made, that's the path the application is on in the process. Again, the reason for the request does not really matter once the request is made. Well, it could matter if failing to provide the PCC constitutes a basis for a negative decision, which could be challenged, but as I repeat rather often, no applicant in their right mind wants things to go down that path. Litigation in Canada, generally not just for citizenship matters, tends to take a long time, years. Not the way to go if it can be avoided.)​

If what you submitted makes it clear that you cannot provide the PCC within the time specified, but that you have initiated the process to obtain a PCC and will submit it when it becomes available, as I noted before, it is likely that EITHER IRCC proceeds with processing the application, OR IRCC in effect puts it on-the-shelf pending receipt of the PCC. (It is not clear to me at which stage of processing you received this request, whether it came from the CPC-Sydney or a local office; if it came from CPC-Sydney my guess, and it is little more than just a guess, is that the application will still be referred to the local office for further processing, and it will a processing agent in the local office who decides when to take the next step.)

B)Should I re-submit my passport scan showing exactly where the exit stamp from this country is ,just to" seal the deal "on this "183 days "claim they kept mentioning in the ADR(yes it may be a robotic message, yet still -apart from intentions & background thoughts -need to be addressed as it was a" formal" communication from IRCC and "formal body/reason "for the ADR title ?

As I addressed above, it is my impression this "ADR" was asking you to provide a PCC or explain why you couldn't. But you are the one who needs to read the request and, as best you can, understand what documents were being requested, and discern if it was also asking you any "additional questions."

Did the ADR request a copy of your passport? If not, that's a big clue.

In the past the title of a form or request or notice might illuminate what it was about, but the content of the communication, and in particular the content that is applicable to the particular applicant, is what really mattered.

There is NOTHING particularly important about the 183 days time frame. That is just the cutoff IRCC uses to determine which applicants need to include a PCC with the application, in order for the application to constitute a "complete" application. For a time it was a total of 183 days over the course of the relevant four years, not 183 days in a row. So it seems unlikely that IRCC is asking for clarification or information about the days you were present in country XXXX, but rather have decided to request a PCC from that country. But, again, it is up to you to read the request and determine what they are asking YOU to provide.

Focus on what, in particular, they asked for in the ADR.

 

[MEB]

How you respond, what you communicate and submit, is really a very personal decision for YOU to make based on your best understanding.

While you have quoted significant parts of the communications you received, YOU are the one who needs to read and interpret them as best you can, and proceed accordingly. While I, like others here, can easily discern that they are asking for a PCC from country XXX, I cannot interpret what more they asked for and how to respond. Read the communications carefully, remembering there is typically extra stuff not applicable to you.

NOTE, for example, the reply you received from IRCC is, as you say, an "automated message." It references conditionals, like "If your enquiry . . . " was this or that. And yeah, this communication is probably little more than an acknowledgement of receipt of whatever you sent, and should in effect preclude a determination you failed to respond (and thus have not abandoned the application). My sense is you could have sent in a mess of gibberish and got this very same response, so it does not indicate anyone has actually read or considered the content of what you sent, not yet anyway.

I am not certain, but my strong impression is that the request YOU received is NOT dependent on whether you spent 183 days in a row in that country during the relevant four year time period. As many others, and I, have noted, these requests are not uncommon and can be for a variety of reasons. The reason for the request does not really matter once the request is made.

(Note: depending on how time abroad was accounted for in the physical presence calculator, for some applicants IRCC might infer presence in another country for 183 or more days even though a significant portion of that time was not actually in that country, and the applicant truthfully checked [No] for question 10.b in the application. And this could be what triggers the PCC request. By mistake, some will say. But once the request is made, it's made, that's the path the application is on in the process. Again, the reason for the request does not really matter once the request is made. Well, it could matter if failing to provide the PCC constitutes a basis for a negative decision, which could be challenged, but as I repeat rather often, no applicant in their right mind wants things to go down that path. Litigation in Canada, generally not just for citizenship matters, tends to take a long time, years. Not the way to go if it can be avoided.)​

If what you submitted makes it clear that you cannot provide the PCC within the time specified, but that you have initiated the process to obtain a PCC and will submit it when it becomes available, as I noted before, it is likely that EITHER IRCC proceeds with processing the application, OR IRCC in effect puts it on-the-shelf pending receipt of the PCC. (It is not clear to me at which stage of processing you received this request, whether it came from the CPC-Sydney or a local office; if it came from CPC-Sydney my guess, and it is little more than just a guess, is that the application will still be referred to the local office for further processing, and it will a processing agent in the local office who decides when to take the next step.)



As I addressed above, it is my impression this "ADR" was asking you to provide a PCC or explain why you couldn't. But you are the one who needs to read the request and, as best you can, understand what documents were being requested, and discern if it was also asking you any "additional questions."

Did the ADR request a copy of your passport? If not, that's a big clue.

In the past the title of a form or request or notice might illuminate what it was about, but the content of the communication, and in particular the content that is applicable to the particular applicant, is what really mattered.

There is NOTHING particularly important about the 183 days time frame. That is just the cutoff IRCC uses to determine which applicants need to include a PCC with the application, in order for the application to constitute a "complete" application. For a time it was a total of 183 days over the course of the relevant four years, not 183 days in a row. So it seems unlikely that IRCC is asking for clarification or information about the days you were present in country XXXX, but rather have decided to request a PCC from that country. But, again, it is up to you to read the request and determine what they are asking YOU to provide.

Focus on what, in particular, they asked for in the ADR.

Thanks @dpenabill...
I concluded that from your perspective-although I agree that is up to me and you are not forcing me in any direction-,attaching the passport and showing the date of my the last /exit stamp leaving that country will not add much value....as you simply and personally do not think the ADR is by any means related to the 183 days calculation...

However, I did not get exactly your own personal opinion about updating them with the new time frame for obtaining the PCC....
In the LOE sent ,I stated+ provided formal evidence that the PCC may take double the maximum ADR time limit ,so was thinking that I need to update them now about taking 3 times such limit to act as further formal input to their upcoming decision.(i.e "Shelf "Vs "Process it now and do more extensive BC later"),but I may be wrong.

-Also ,even though they may or may not be aware of this "very "new time frame in the background ,It showed also I was not exaggerating ,trying to evade the PCC or was being dishonest ,when I mentioned in the LOE that from previous experience it is common that these 4 months may be exceeded with ease (regardless or not if they care about the 2 months difference).

-Kindly note that I did not clearly show that I started the process -as I replied to the ADR on the first day of receiving it-,only showed an official letter from embassy that this could talk 4 months without mentioning the date and reason of having such correspondence. That being said , is it better now to attach the most recent communication that confirmed the 6 months duration ,as an act of further due diligence & evidence of kicking off the process somehow?

-Regarding when I got the ADR,I received 4 X AOR(for the 4 of us, as we submitted one file) + one ADR for my PCC(my wife did not get it even though she had identical presence time frame ) ,within almost 10 mins! So total of 4 AOR+1 ADR in 10 mins on 3/3/2023.

Bregards
MEB

 

[abbas.pasha]

This is becoming an essay writing thx @dpenabill

 

[MEB]

This is becoming an essay writing thx @dpenabill

Hahahah yeah ,I never had a direct conversation with @dpenabill since I was a member of this forum ,now trying to take whatever amount of advise I can get


Really valuable insights ! Thanks again @dpenabill

 

[cool_eagle]

There's no issue with the response you provided in your application form. IRCC can chose to request a PCC regardless of whether someone has the 183 days or not. You can certainly submit a webform and ask IRCC if they will drop this requirement. However my strong recommendation is that you also start the process to obtain the PCC as well. It will take a while for IRCC to respond to the webform and they may still require you to obtain the PCC anyway. Up to you what you do of course.

@scylla
Thanks a lot for your expert help. My case is somewhat similar. I havn't applied for citizenship applicaiton. I am planning to apply. But, after reading some posts, I have little bit become apprehensive of applying. After landing I went back to my homeland, and came after 1.75 year. So, if we see
4 year eligibility window, I havn't stayed in my cuontry for more than 150 days accordign to my current calculation.

It is difficult to get PCC from my country for that period, as i mixed up some address in my recent PR application. My PR has been renewed few months ago. However, in my country, PCC is local and city-wise and is issued from cities. And, in my PR, i entered one city address, for which it is difficult to get PCC, as it requires rent agreement, and I was living there without proper rent agreement (I am cursing that moment when I entered that address in my PR renewal application). although it is of few months, but it is now in their system. Should I change the address of that city in my citizenship applicaiton? well, I am of the view that it is in their system, so I shouldn't change it. It may be a blunder.

And, after seeing some posts on this forum, i observed that people who were although less than 183 days in a row in their home country (after landing canada, and then went back), but close to it like 176 days or 170 days, got triggered either by officer or flagged by system, and they were asked to provide PCC. So my question is, whats your expert judgement or opinion, should I wait more for 1-2 months to apply for citizenship.........or should wait altogether for next 4-5 months, so that my prior stay in my home country ago goes completely out of window of 4 years, (as I am currently living in canada), thus then there will be no need of giving PCC , as I would completely been in canada at that time e.g. If i apply in Aug 2023, 4 year requirement for PCC will beign from aug 2019, and at that time, I had landed here, so no out of canada stay . Whats the safest option here will be.??

Apologize for such a long post,

 

[Jaywalker]

Hi all,

Just received an ADR for my citizenship application for a police certificate from a GCC country I was working as an expat in, before moving to Canada.

I was working in this GCC country from 1st of April 2014 till 3rd of July 2019 .

I got approved for Canadian PR in 2017 and hence we -as a family- proceeded with soft landing in August 2018.

I returned to resume my expat role in the GCC country till 3rd of July 2019 ,after which moved to Canada permanently in August 2019.

By the time we were able to complete all required documents & forms to submit the Citizenship application it was the 6th of January 2023 (we submitted our combined applications on the 7th of January 2023).

Upon reaching section 10 b in Citizenship application, we answered the following question as “NO”

“In the past 4 years, were you in a country or territory other than Canada for 183 days or more in a row (Since the age of 18)? ”

We provided such answer, as the date 4 years before our application submission date was (7th of January 2019), hence the associated period until we left such country as expats (3rd of July 2019) was less than 183 days(Around 176 days).

Once we selected “No”, the associated table to fill- if you will provide Police Certificate or not and related explanation- is dimmed and cannot by typed in.

Furthermore, we never left Canada since our perm. move for more than 6 weeks, and all these visits were to our country of citizenship only (twice)

Finally, my wife is having exact timelines ,and was not asked for a Police certificate (Me, my wife and my 2 kids filed our application together) !

However, I solely received an ADR from IRCC for Police certificate from the GCC country or a letter of explanation on why I cannot submit it .So why are they requesting such certificate and only from me ,if my wife have an identical timeline and we filled our application together+ we did not spend 183 successive days in any country since our COPR date!

Appreciate your urgent feedback guys!

I have seen people getting asked for PCC with much lesser days than yours. It’s up to IRCC discretion. You don’t have any option but to oblige.