Form CIT 0039 (05-2015) - Prohibitions Under the Citizenship Act

[wbmaple]

One of the forum members kindly provided a copy of the current Form CIT 0039 (05-2015) - Prohibitions Under the Citizenship Act. After C-6's 3/5 rule comes into effect this fall, there will be some changes in this form, presumably including the following:
Question 1: 6 years will be replaced by 5 years. (Pretty confident of this change)
Questions 13 and 14: 4 years will be replaced by 3 years. (Not sure of this change)

If any forum members have received a different version of this form, please correct me accordingly.

Anyway, the one page I have reads as follows:

You will not be granted citizenship and cannot take the Oath of Citizenship if any of the following prohibitions apply to you.

PROHIBITIONS UNDER THE CITIZENSHIP ACT​

1. Are you now, or have you ever been in the last 6 years:

• On probation?
• On parole?
• An inmate of a penitentiary, jail, reformatory, or prison?

2. Are you now serving a sentence outside Canada for an offence?

3. Are you now charged with, on trial for, or subject to or a party to an appeal relating to, an offence under the Citizenship Act or an indictable offence in Canada?

4. Are you now charged with, on trial for, or subject to or a party to an appeal relating to, an offence outside Canada?

5. Are you now, or have you ever been, under a removal order (have you been asked by Canadian officials to leave Canada)?

6. Are you now under investigation for, charged with, on trial for, subject to or a party to an appeal relating to or have you been convicted of a war crime or a crime against humanity?

7. Have you directly or indirectly misrepresented or withheld material circumstances relating to this application, or in the past 5 years, were you prohibited from being granted citizenship or taking the Oath because of misrepresentation or withholding material circumstances?

8. In the past 10 years, have you had Canadian citizenship which has been taken away (revoked) for reasons of false representation, fraud, or knowingly concealing material circumstances?

9. Have you had Canadian citizenship which has been taken away (revoked) because you were convicted of terrorism, high treason, or spying offences or because you served as a member of an armed force of a country or an organized armed group and that country or group engaged in armed conflict with Canada?

10. While a permanent resident, have you been convicted in Canada of terrorism, high treason, treason, or spying offences?

11. While a permanent resident, have you been convicted outside Canada of terrorism offences?

12. While a permanent resident, have you served as a member of an armed force of a country or an organized armed group and that country or group engaged in armed conflict with Canada?

13. In the past 4 years, have you been convicted of an indictable offence under any Act of Parliament or an offence under the Citizenship Act?

14. In the past 4 years, have you been convicted of an offence outside Canada, regardless of whether you were pardoned or otherwise granted amnesty for the offence?


CIT 0039 (05-2015) E GCMS (DISPONIBLE EN FRANCAIS – CIT 0039 F)

 

[dpenabill]

After C-6's 3/5 rule comes into effect this fall, there will be some changes in this form, presumably including the following:
Question 1: 6 years will be replaced by 5 years. (Pretty confident of this change)
Questions 13 and 14: 4 years will be replaced by 3 years. (Not sure of this change)

You will not be granted citizenship and cannot take the Oath of Citizenship if any of the following prohibitions apply to you.

This form tends to change and, indeed, the form quoted is already out-of-date; while I am not sure there is in fact a new form (I have not seen a copy of the current form), the odds are high there is already a new version given some provisions in Bill C-6 which took effect upon Royal Assent (June 19, 2017) and which are relevant to some items listed. If not, there will be one soon in use.

While I am not sure of the current procedure, this prohibitions disclosure form has also been used during the interview, and in particular an applicant can be required to complete this form multiple times during the application process. That said, typically there is item 8 in the application (which is framed differently but nonetheless basically covers the same items, requires the same disclosures), then this form at the interview, and again for the oath.

It is important to pay attention to the specific form the applicant is given, since this form does change. Do not rely on any other copy of the form, other than the one which is actually presented. Even if the applicant is sure no prohibitions apply, some of the items may require an affirmative response (a "yes"). For several items a "yes" response will not necessarily mean there is a prohibition.

I assume the form is what it is, but there is also some language quoted which frankly is at least incongruous.

In any event, even if that version of the form is precisely what is quoted, some clarifications are warranted.

Foremost, again, an affirmative answer to some of the questions will NOT necessarily mean there is a prohibition which applies to the applicant.

In particular, the list includes several items which are not necessarily prohibitions. Thus, a "yes" answer to some items does not necessarily mean the applicant will not be granted citizenship.


Item 9 probably removed in current form:

As I noted, there should be a new form already in use (if not, there will be soon). Item 9 in the list, for example, no longer applies as of June 19, 2017, because Section 10(2) in the Citizenship Act was repealed as of that date. Item 9 asks whether the applicant has lost citizenship based on grounds previously prescribed in Section 10(2) in the Citizenship Act (terrorism conviction or such). There is no authority for this now and in particular there can be no person who has lost citizenship based on these grounds. This is pursuant to provisions in Bill C-6 which came into effect upon Royal Assent (see Sections 3(1) and 20 in Bill C-6; Section 3(1) in Bill C-6 repealing section 10(2) in the Citizenship Act, and Section 20 in Bill C-6 prescribing that persons whose citizenship had been revoked pursuant to the repealed provision are deemed never to have had their citizenship revoked).

Of course this particular item related only to a very few anyway, perhaps a number one could count on the fingers of one hand. In any event, it is now totally gone, history.


Item 1 and Probation:

Item 1, for example, asks whether or not the applicant is now or within the last 6 six years has been on probation. An applicant may answer yes, having been on probation within the last six years, but that will not necessarily mean a prohibtion applies to the applicant, and thus does not necessarily mean the applicant cannot be granted citizenship. It would depend on when, how long, and why. As I have previously stated, for example, periods of probation do not count toward meeting the physical presence requirement.

Probation results in a prohibition in the following circumstances:
-- it was imposed pursuant to a conviction for an indictable offence within four years prior to the application, or at any time while the application has been in process (the actual prohibition which applies in this case is the prohibition for being convicted of an indictable offence)
-- the applicant was still on probation at the time the application was made, or has been on probation during the time the application has been in process (this includes probation for summary offences not just indictable offences)

Otherwise, a completed period of probation within the previous six years is not a prohibition, but if the amount of time on probation during the six years is subtracted from the presence calculation, and the net is less than 1460, the applicant fails to meet the presence requirement and will not be granted citizenship (note that under current 4/6 rule there is also the 183 days X 4 years requirement, and a loss of days for probation could easily cause a PR to fall short of this presence requirement).

I agree that when the 3/5 rule comes into force, the form will change and refer to five rather than six years (in relation to this, the way this item is phrased, as quoted, does not appear to be right to me, since the time period really goes back to six years prior to the date of the application, not just the last six years before the form is signed . . . but again, I have not seen a copy of the form currently in use).


Item 5; regarding removal order:

This is another one of the items for which a "yes" answer, as in yes to having ever been under a removal order, does NOT necessarily mean a prohibition applies, and thus does not necessarily mean the applicant will not be granted citizenship. This is another item for which the effect of the removal order depends on when and why the applicant was under it. Being under a removal order at the time of applying, or at any time while the application is in process, will constitute a prohibition.



Items 13, regarding conviction for an indictable offence in Canada:

This is NOT going to change when the 3/5 rule comes into force. Subsection 22(2)(a) in the Citizenship Act prescribes that the prohibition for a conviction of an indictable offence (and certain other offences as specified) applies for any conviction within the FOUR years prior to applying. This is not amended by Bill C-6. It will still be for four years.

Item 14, regarding conviction for an offence outside Canada:

Similar to the prohibition for convictions in Canada, the applicable period of time for convictions outside Canada is also four years, per subsection 22(3)(a), and here too this is not changed by Bill C-6.

I have seen a few queries or comments correlating this prohibition with the presence requirement, inferring that since the four year presence requirement will be reduced to three years, the period for this prohibition should or might change to three years. There is no corrrelation. The provisions prescribing the prohibition are separate. It will still be four years (unless there is some other legislative Bill adopted to change this in the future).

Otherwise, also note that Item 14 is another one for which a "yes" response will NOT necessarily result in a prohibition, and thus will not necessarily mean the applicant will be denied citizenship. The question is broader than the prohibition. It asks the applicant to disclose ANY offence outside Canada. However, only if the offence itself would constitute an indictable offence in Canada does it result in a prohibition. One of the somewhat common examples I have seen has to do with some countries making it a crime to not pay a debt. A foreign conviction for such an offence should not result in a prohibition since the elements of the offence would not constitute an indictable offence if done in Canada (unless it is based on actual fraud rather than presumptive fraud based on a failure to pay).

The applicant still needs to truthfully answer the item as asked, no matter how certain the applicant is that the foreign offence does not constitute a prohibition, since it is ultimately up to IRCC to make that determination.

 

[Sa3Sa3]

I received the same one yesterday. It has been mailed out to me in Jul 10th

Page1:

Page2:

 

[Sa3Sa3]

Any idea why would some applicants receive this form with the test invitation while others don't?

 

[Stef.]

No, but frankly it makes no difference. I signed mine yesterday during the interview. Might be different from office to office.