More than most want to know . . . for the few that might . . .
I left Canada for NZ on 7th November 2021 and returned to Canada on 8th May 2022. If I include the days I left and returned this makes 183 days but if I don't it's 181 days. Unsure whether to check yes or no for: In the past 4 years, were you in a country or territory other than Canada for 183 days or more in a row?
I'm happy to get a police check either way but just wanted to get other opinions.
I largely agree with other responses . . . but with a caveat. Not all non-routine processing is created equal and that is in large part rooted in the rather obvious fact that not all reasons or causes for processing that is in addition to that which is routine for any application are created equal.
My sense is that the other responses cover the better approach if the accurate answer to Question 10.b) is [No] but the applicant was there for nearly six months. Not sure it will work to avoid non-routine processing, but at the least it should minimize the extent of non-routine processing and reduce the risk of delays.
A Calculation Clarification:
I'll answer No and attach the police cert to the extra documents page at the end.
If you were
IN the other country for 183 or more days in a row, the accurate answer to Question 10.b) is [Yes]
If you were
IN the other country (NZ or otherwise) for 182 or fewer days in a row, the accurate answer to Question 10.b) is [No]
So, let's be clear: Question 10.b) in the Citizenship application, CIT 0002, is a very simple, straightforward fact question, asking whether the applicant was IN another country for 183 or more days in a row. In the vast majority of situations this really is NOT complicated. Including here. Count the days. That is, count the days that were spent in a particular country, from day one to the last day IN that country.
Day of arrival in that country is, obviously, a day you were in that country. Obviously it counts.
Day of departure from that country is again obviously a day you were in that country. Obviously it counts.
Much like counting days in Canada for purposes of calculating physical presence for citizenship and for RO compliance. Day of arrival in Canada and day of departure count as days in the country. Because, well,
DUH (apologies if this comes across rude), those are days IN the country. Even though part of the day was spent IN another country.
Yeah, a person can be IN more than one country during a given calendar day. Being in one country during a given day does NOT exclude being in another country during that same day.
(Note: there can be a distinction in regards to calculating days being physically present versus being resident in a country; until 2015 eligibility for citizenship in Canada depended on days "resident" in Canada, which were not calculated the same as RO compliance days were calculated, not the same as the current physical presence calculation for grant citizenship purposes.)
Sorry for in effect pounding the podium here, but counting days physically present in a country is NOT complicated, not nuanced. Just count the days IN the country. If they add up to 183 or more in a row, the accurate answer to question 10.b) is [Yes].
EXCEPT . . . there is the briefly-broken-stay scenario:
See Example 4 in
the guide for the citizenship application, regarding how to answer Question 10.b). IRCC does not make it clear that if one of the ten day trips outside of Singapore was during the 200 day period of time in Singapore the applicant would still need to check [Yes] even though they were not physically present in Singapore for 183 or more days in a row. (Say it was 170 days in Singapore, then a ten day trip to Thailand, then back to Singapore for 30 more days.)
It would certainly NOT be misrepresentation to check [No] based on not being physically present in Singapore for 183 or more days in a row. But the risk of non-routine processing would likely be high.
There is no doubt how I would approach that. Instead of interpreting the 183 or more days in a row to be only about physical presence, I would answer [Yes] based on the trip to Singapore being essentially for 200 days, and include a clearance . . . as what should suffice as an honest answer and also an approach less likely to trigger non-routine processing, avoiding being asked for a clearance later in the process, and reducing the risk of non-routine inquiries to verify no criminal charges in Singapore.
