Brand New Form at the Oath

[peterperez]

Others in the forum have reported signing a form that asked about criminal matters, confirming that no charges have arisen between the time of submitting the application and taking the oath. This is the form mentioned by arambi. skywards747 is stating that a new form came out on June 11th, so it would be good to get more reports of what this new form contains.

So this new intend to reside form is for everyone including for the people applying with the old law ?

 

[handsomeishere]

Interesting ,

 

[Canadian24]

From the new form for adult application, the intent clause below is confusing. I have seen 2 explanations.

One that this clause is applicable only upto the time you become a Citizen. And the other, this may be considered a misrepresentation of facts and your citizenship can be revoked.

I intend, if granted citizenship,
• to continue to reside in Canada;
• to enter into, or continue in, employment outside Canada in or with the Canadian Armed Forces, the federal public administration or the public service of a province, otherwise than as a locally engaged person; or
• to reside with my spouse or common-law partner, or parent, who is a Canadian citizen or permanent resident and is employed outside Canada in or with the Canadian Armed Forces, the federal public administration or public service of a province, otherwise than as a locally engaged person

 

[Ashkan]

From the new form for adult application, the intent clause below is confusing. I have seen 2 explanations.

One that this clause is applicable only upto the time you become a Citizen. And the other, this may be considered a misrepresentation of facts and your citizenship can be revoked.

I intend, if granted citizenship,
• to continue to reside in Canada;
• to enter into, or continue in, employment outside Canada in or with the Canadian Armed Forces, the federal public administration or the public service of a province, otherwise than as a locally engaged person; or
• to reside with my spouse or common-law partner, or parent, who is a Canadian citizen or permanent resident and is employed outside Canada in or with the Canadian Armed Forces, the federal public administration or public service of a province, otherwise than as a locally engaged person

according to the cic website and C24 law intention of reside should be satisfied until up the taking the oath. in cic website "instruction guide" for filling form in section 10 it clearly says:
"This requirement signals that citizenship is for those who intend to make their home in Canada. Applicants for citizenship must satisfy this requirement up until the taking of the Oath of Citizenship. However, this requirement would not limit citizens' mobility rights. New citizens will be able to leave and return to the country like other citizens."

however having new form signed by applicant for intention of reside in time of oath is in contradiction with what they said.

 

[april2015]

on CIC website http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/citizenship/become-eligibility.asp#reside this is what it says :-

Intent to reside

You must declare your intent to reside during the citizenship application process.

To become a citizen, you must indicate your intention to:

* live in Canada,
* work outside Canada as a Crown servant, or
* live abroad with certain family members who are Crown servants.

Once you become a Canadian citizen, you have the right to enter, remain in, or leave Canada, one of the basic rights of citizenship.

I guess the above that I have highlighted in Italics clears all the confusion

 

[peterperez]

on CIC website http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/citizenship/become-eligibility.asp#reside this is what it says :-

Intent to reside

You must declare your intent to reside during the citizenship application process.

To become a citizen, you must indicate your intention to:

* live in Canada,
* work outside Canada as a Crown servant, or
* live abroad with certain family members who are Crown servants.

Once you become a Canadian citizen, you have the right to enter, remain in, or leave Canada, one of the basic rights of citizenship.

I guess the above that I have highlighted in Italics clears all the confusion


If that is true friend then why like people are getting forms after the oath to sign and say their intention to live in canada even after getting the Canadian passport ?

 

[april2015]

No idea dude. I won't be able to comment unless I see it myself as we have 2 different infos here, some confirming that their family member receiving the form with Intent to Reside while on the other hand there are some others also confirming that they never got any such form. So I guess there is a huge confusion among people or may be they are mixing up something else with Intent to Reside.

 

[dpenabill]

. . . why people are getting forms after the oath to sign and say their intention to live in canada even after getting the Canadian passport ?

Having to sign any such forms after the oath?

Not happening.

Maybe it is not a widely known phenomena, but there are reports that not everything posted on the Internet is, might we say, the gospel truth.

 

[alphazip]

No idea dude. I won't be able to comment unless I see it myself as we have 2 different infos here, some confirming that their family member receiving the form with Intent to Reside while on the other hand there are some others also confirming that they never got any such form. So I guess there is a huge confusion among people or may be they are mixing up something else with Intent to Reside.

So far, ONE person is reporting a new form (as of June 11th) that has to be signed "prior to taking the oath." Others are talking about the form on criminality that has had to be signed before taking the oath for some time. Anyone claiming that a form has to be signed after taking the oath is mistaken. We won't know more about this new form (whether it exists, whether it differs from the old form, etc.) until additional people who take the oath in coming days report back on the form's contents.

 

[MUFC]

For those who are worried that now they have to sign Intend to reside in Canada ... Don't worry people your punishment to continue living in Canada is over.
Better think about the airplane tickets.

 

[keesio]

according to the cic website and C24 law intention of reside should be satisfied until up the taking the oath. in cic website "instruction guide" for filling form in section 10 it clearly says:
"This requirement signals that citizenship is for those who intend to make their home in Canada. Applicants for citizenship must satisfy this requirement up until the taking of the Oath of Citizenship. However, this requirement would not limit citizens' mobility rights. New citizens will be able to leave and return to the country like other citizens."

however having new form signed by applicant for intention of reside in time of oath is in contradiction with what they said.

It is confusing and I try my best to explain it here:
http://www.canadavisa.com/canada-immigration-discussion-board/what-is-second-class-citizen-t305240.0.html;msg4390758#msg4390758

That is why I think everyone is overreacting to this

 

[Munchenxx]

I don't know why ppl are so scared and emotional.
the CIC website says very clearly, once you become citizen, you can reside in or leave this country as you wish, as a basic human rights.

 

[MUFC]

I don't know why ppl are so scared and emotional.
the CIC website says very clearly, once you become citizen, you can reside in or leave this country as you wish, as a basic human rights.

Most of them don't read the Law and prefer to believe in rumours.

 

[dpenabill]

Same malarkey, different topic, same call to be sure the deliberate effort to deceive and misinform is not left unchallenged:



A few of those who are reacting to the red herring, unfounded accusation that section 5(1)(c.1) (the oft called "intent" requirement), in the Citizenship Act as revised by the SCCA, are indeed not particularly well informed as to what the now current requirements are, what they mean, or how they may be applied, but have been alarmed by some rather persistent and inflammatory rhetoric regarding this requirement.

To be frank, they are the victim of what is clearly deliberate misinformation. These victims are the only reason I continue to respond to the noise about this, to help (several others are similarly quelling the dissemination of misinformation by reminders that there is no impact on citizens, just those in the process of applying for citizenship, during the process itself) keep the airways clear that there is no reason for genuine citizens who honestly acquired their citizenship to have any fear about making life choices in the future which might involve going abroad to live or work.

To be frank those deliberately promoting misinformation, the unfounded, inaccurate, hyperbolic rhetoric, are mostly of two sorts:

-- the typical trolls, trolling for a reaction, no regard for the actual substance, but feeding off the elevated attention generated by the subject (like most forums, this one has its share of these)

-- those for whom the changes make it more difficult to pursue a passport of convenience, those who in the past would be among applicants-applying-on-the-way-to-the-airport or more recently hoping at least to be among those taking-the-oath-on-the-way-to-the-airport (more than a few participants here are among this group).

As I have otherwise noted, no one is really fooling anybody about what underlies much of the frenzy of hyperbolic criticism: the changes are going to make it far more difficult to take-the-oath-on-the-way-to-the-airport, and they will all but preclude being a successful applicant who has applied-on-the-way-to-the-airport.

Their noise is just that, noise.

Unfortunately, more than a year ago the Canadian Bar Association, and some other observers, contributed to the misinformation by prematurely submitting misguided comments without actually analyzing so much as the actual language of the, at that time merely proposed, provisions. All that has long been dismissed, and those misguided comments are of no import to sincere and rational observers.

But those whose agenda it is to perpetuate the dissemination of misinformation have seized such comments and continue to leverage them into a façade of legitimacy, a pretense of reason. Feeding wildlife is rarely a good idea, and feeding the trolls is a particularly bad idea. No need to be Norwegian to grasp this.

In any event, the main point to be made contrary to the persistent effort to misinform, is that those who have legitimately acquired citizenship have no reason to fear the government taking away their citizenship, even if later in life they decide to live or work abroad.

 

[keesio]

I don't know why ppl are so scared and emotional.

That's just human nature. People overreact to begin with and then there are s**t-disturbers who like to rile people up with half-truths. Just look at media and politics.