Dalim said:
. . . I should not enter as Tourist and stay there for 2 years and then apply for PR renewal.
If I am reported (which will be case) and I believe they will allow me IN and will start my Appeal. I presume during appeal time I will be treated as PR until the decision made. If it took more than two years, then just after two years will I be able to apply for PR card renewal?
Rob_TO pretty well covered it.
But here is my typically longer, more detailed response:
If a 44(1) Report (report of inadmissibility due to breach of residency obligation) is issued at the POE, that is usually followed in short order (there at the POE) by a Removal Order, the PR will be allowed to enter Canada and has a specified time within which to make an appeal. In the meantime, once in Canada, the individual is indeed a Permanent Resident, and remains one until the appeal is decided. If the appeal is won (such as if there are H&C grounds in effect excusing the failure to be in Canada), that's the end of it. The individual's PR status is intact.
If the appeal is lost, the Removal Order becomes enforceable, PR status is lost.
Time present in Canada after a 44(1) report has been issued does
NOT count toward compliance with the PR residency obligation
unless the appeal is won.
Additional observations:
A Permanent Resident cannot legally enter Canada as a "tourist." For individuals with a visa-exempt passport, this means that even though an airline might allow the individual to board a flight to Canada without presenting a valid PR card, at the POE the individual cannot legally apply for entry into Canada as a visitor.
This is because visitor status is only available to Foreign Nationals who meet the specified criteria for a grant of visitor status.
A PR is not a Foreign National. Thus not eligible for visitor status.
Practically speaking, though, you are alluding to something that was rather common in the past: PRs entering Canada using foreign travel documents and then in effect laying low until they were again in compliance with the PR residency obligation.
It has been a long while since I entered Canada without displaying either a valid PR card (up to earlier this year) or Canadian passport (last six months), so I cannot say I know what questions will be asked.
Information not asked does not need to be divulged. In the old days, this was a big advantage for PRs in breach of the Residency Obligation but carrying a visa-exempt passport. Particularly for those who approached entry into Canada via a land crossing from the U.S.: they presented their passport and were waived through without question. Once in Canada they could legally remain and work and so on. So long as they did not leave or file an application with CIC, and they waited until they were in compliance with the PR residency obligation (reached the date for which they had then, as of that date, been in Canada for at least 730 days within the immediately preceding five years), they would then thereafter be in compliance and be able to retain valid PR status.
My sense is that this is
usually not the case any more. Any travel document the PR presents should result in the examining officer being aware the traveler is a Canadian PR. And is thus likely to trigger questions and a referral to secondary, where there will likely be questions the answers to which will lead to a residency examination and 44(1) Report.
While there is no requirement that a returning PR give information beyond honest answers to the questions asked, any attempt to conceal from a POE officer that one is a PR, whether by overt deception or material misrepresentation (including by omission), will constitute grounds for not only inadmissibility (apart from and in addition to inadmissibility for a breach of the residency obligation), but potentially being banned from Canada even as a visitor, and potentially even criminal prosecution.
Similarly, it is highly likely you will be asked "when were you last in Canada?" or, in recognition of your PR status, "how long have you been outside Canada?" Anything less than a truthful answer, including an evasive answer, will constitute a misrepresentation, with predictable and serious consequences.
In other words, what many people in a situation similar to yours did in the past, which was to as quietly as possible get back into Canada and remain for two years so as to then be in compliance with the PR residency obligation, is basically no longer feasible.
