Frustrated!!!PLEASE HELP, Leon or anybody. Conjugal Partnership e-mail.

[tuyen]

I feel sorry for this dirty world that someone like you would feel SYMPATHY for people.

I told you - I feel sympathy for people who are doing EVERYTHING THEY POSSIBLY CAN to be together. But that doesn't include you, because you're doing the exact OPPOSITE of what needs to be done. So why should I feel sympathy for someone who is going out of her way to ensure a long and difficult process?

You don't know for political reasons my partner cannot reach Iranian authorities to obtain a certificate to marry in Turkey or elsewhere, and I cannot share this story for security reasons.

There are MANY countries in Europe in which you can get married, and you DON'T NEED PERMISSION from your father, nor from Iran, nor from anyone else. The only thing you need to do is go to a consulate or embassy, and swear under oath that both of you are legally allowed to get married. You will be asked to show identification to prove your age and nationality. If they ask your boyfriend for any documentation from Iran, you can simply explain (still under oath) that you're unable to get anything from Iran because of political persecution/religious fanaticism, etc etc etc, which makes it impossible for your boyfriend to obtain anything. For you, however, it should be VERY easy to obtain all the necessary paperwork to get married, because you're a Canadian citizen.

In Italy, for example, the only documentation you need (aside from your passport) is a "Nulla Osta", which is a "Certificate of Non-Impediment". In other words, it's a declaration that says there is nothing preventing you from legally being married. Canada does not issue CNIs, but they will give you something called a "Statement In Lieu of Certificate of Non-Impediment to Marriage Abroad". You can get this by applying for it through the mail from the Department of Foreign Affairs. It has to be done through the mail, and can't be done in person. After they receive your application, it can take anywhere from a few days up to 25 days to receive it. If you don't get this document while you're in Canada, you can still get it inside Italy, but it will cost you around 500 Euros there. If your boyfriend is unable to get his Nulla Osta from the Italian embassy in Tehran, he will have to get it done inside Italy.

The reason I chose Italy as an example, is because it's very easy for non-Italians to get married there. The only residency requirement is the 3-4 days it takes to file your marriage application through the local municipal government, so you will have to be in Italy for 3-4 days, but it's better to plan for one week just in case.

I think you're very rude. I shouldn't even try to reply to your msg, but in the future don't judge people in this rude and offensive way, while you know nothing about cases and what you read here is a small part of a whole story.

You can go ahead and think whatever you want. You can call me "rude", you can call me "judgmental", or you can call me Fred Flintstone. It doesn't matter to me, because I don't know you and I don't have any emotional ties to you. But what DOES matter is your sponsorship application. If you want it to be rejected, go ahead and continue doing exactly what you're doing, and I guarantee with 100% certainty that you and your boyfriend will be living in Iran LONG before you will ever be living together in Canada.

 

[aerogurl87]

I'm gonna be honest, this sounds like it will be an uphill battle. From an outsiders perspective, it sounds like you just don't wasn't to get married or live together because it would inconvenience your lives. Unfortunately CIC doesn't care about what works best for you. They figure if you two are really in love you will move heaven and earth to be together. So you have to prove them wrong. Take out all the emotions and look at things from their viewpoint, and go from there. Good luck though, hope it all works out for you both.

 

[computergeek]

I'm find be honest, this sounds like it will be an uphill battle. From an outsiders perspective, it sounds like you just don't wasn't to get married or live together because it would inconvenience your lives. Unfortunately CIC doesn't care about what works best for you. They figure if you two are really in love you will move heaven and earth to be together. So you have to prove them wrong. Take out all the emotions and look at things from their viewpoint, and go from there. Good luck though, hope it all works out for you both.

The case law here runs the gamut. We have the basic fact that they cannot require marriage enshrined in case law, for example (which is why there is a common-law partner class in the first place) because "the right not to marry is a fundamental right". We also have religious and cultural values here that are difficult to dismiss. Some of us come from cultural backgrounds in which going against family wishes or marrying outside a religious environment are acceptable, but that does not mean that the law allows us to impose our religious and/or cultural requirements on other people.

I for one suspect I don't have enough information to make a decision on the OPs case. She's in the conjugal class in the first place, which is a very difficult class to convince a VO. By pushing on the possibility of going to a third country not common to either of them my sense is the VO may be pushing hard on the edge of "right not to marry". But I honestly don't know.

I think cautioning the OP is wise - explaining that from an outsider's perspective the obvious question is "why don't you just go to a third country and get married or live together?" She needs to be able to answer that question, because it's the question the VO is asking. If it is because of religious or cultural values and beliefs about marriage, she should explain so. The VO will need to decide how well that meshes with both CIC procedure and existing case law. I'm not going to pretend to understand the case law here well enough to say one way or the other. The case PMM quoted is interesting but may not be directly applicable to this case.

But personal attacks on the OP - even if you disagree with her decisions, is not really constructive. Caution her, sure. Chastise her like a child? Not useful. She needs to make her own decision and live with the consequences of that decision, even if some (or all of us) think it is unwise.

 

[BCgirl2012]

CG, Agreed. Constructive guidance is preferable to scorning on any day!

I was browsing CanLii. I came across this one, which is obviously a difficult case. It deals with the "right not to get married" as well.
http://canlii.org/eliisa/highlight.do?text=conjugal+sponsorship&language=en&searchTitle=Search+all+CanLII+Databases&path=/en/ca/irb/doc/2006/2006canlii52352/2006canlii52352.html


Erina, I would suggest that you search CanLii with (sponsorship, conjugal, iran) you will see many examples. Maybe some of them are similar to your case. I hope all turns well for you guys, and you'll receive your approval very soon.

 

[Steph C]

The case law here runs the gamut. We have the basic fact that they cannot require marriage enshrined in case law, for example (which is why there is a common-law partner class in the first place) because "the right not to marry is a fundamental right". We also have religious and cultural values here that are difficult to dismiss. Some of us come from cultural backgrounds in which going against family wishes or marrying outside a religious environment are acceptable, but that does not mean that the law allows us to impose our religious and/or cultural requirements on other people.

I for one suspect I don't have enough information to make a decision on the OPs case. She's in the conjugal class in the first place, which is a very difficult class to convince a VO. By pushing on the possibility of going to a third country not common to either of them my sense is the VO may be pushing hard on the edge of "right not to marry". But I honestly don't know.

I think cautioning the OP is wise - explaining that from an outsider's perspective the obvious question is "why don't you just go to a third country and get married or live together?" She needs to be able to answer that question, because it's the question the VO is asking. If it is because of religious or cultural values and beliefs about marriage, she should explain so. The VO will need to decide how well that meshes with both CIC procedure and existing case law. I'm not going to pretend to understand the case law here well enough to say one way or the other. The case PMM quoted is interesting but may not be directly applicable to this case.

But personal attacks on the OP - even if you disagree with her decisions, is not really constructive. Caution her, sure. Chastise her like a child? Not useful. She needs to make her own decision and live with the consequences of that decision, even if some (or all of us) think it is unwise.

My opinion on this as a Conjugal applicant myself:

If it was at all possible to marry my partner, come hell or high water I would have done it years ago, anywhere, anyhow. Our desire to marry is so strong that we would have gone anywhere or done anything to get married. Unfortunately, we can't. His country doesn't allow divorce. He was denied a visitor's visa to Canada. We waited years for an annulment that never came through. 3 long years for that annulment so we could marry properly and submit the best application we could to CIC. 3 years being apart, wasting away, just so that we could do the right thing and the thing we wanted most.
I know people have rights to marry how and where they wish, but it seems a bit indulgent to me, someone on the other side of the fence.. if I could marry my love I would do so at any cost.

 

[niloogoogooli]

after reading these posts i just want to mention that we are not here to JUDGE one another but to help each other out...obviously she is seeking advice...and we are not in her shoes and not in her exact circumstance so in my opinion its better to help with constructive comments rather to question her decisions and choices...
With that said for people suggesting Europe...if her boyfriend has such a hard time coming to Trukey i guarantee you guys that its a 100 times more difficult to obtain a visa on top of everything else he has to go through...as you all know the situation with iran is on rocky grounds with almost most countries....
Erina stick with your gut feeling and just go for it....if its meant to be it will happen...if not then there are other possibilities you could look in to

 

[aerogurl87]

I wasn't being judgmental but stating the truth. Proving a conjugal case is hard. And the VO has doubts on them being applicable as such obviously. So the right thing to do at this point is to look at things from an outsider's point of view. Don't let your emotions get involved and write out in the clearest, most effective, and persuasive argument you have for your case. CIC doesn't want to know why they won't get married or live together. They want to know why that reason should be good enough for them to stamp a PR via for the applicant.

 

[amikety]

I want being judgmental but staying the truth. Proving a conjugal case is hard. And the VO has doubts on them being applicable as such obviously. So the right thing to do at this point is to look at things from an outsider's point of view. Don't let your emotions get involved and write out in the clearest, most effective, and persuasive argument you have for your case. CIC doesn't want to know why they won't get married or live together. They want to know why that reason should be good enough for them to stamp a PR via for the applicant.

I don't think you have anything to worry about.... you were being truthful and respectful. You certainly weren't name calling.

Regarding the marrying thing, while I personally don't understand it, marriage has become something undesirable to some people. We should respect their decisions and personal feelings regarding marriage. I too would overcome hell or high water to get married, but that's me. If you're looking at marriage as just a piece of paper, doing it just for the sake of immigration doesn't do much to give it a positive light. My husband was actually anti-marriage and refused to even get legally divorced from his ex-wife at first. He had his own reasons - the only reason they became my business was because we entered a relationship - and that's his business. With divorce rates of a marriage hovering around 50% in North America, the idea that marriage somehow makes a relationship "real" or "long lasting" is out of date.

I do agree, though, that strict rules need to be in place for Conjugal, as it would be very easy for scammers to target if it was lax.

 

[Erina]

Computergeek, BCGirl, and my dear Niloo, thank you very much. Your comments really make me cry as you are all helping someone who you don't know... Niloo you're absolutely right. You're Persian and you know how challenging it's for us... For going to Turkey as the officer asked us, there are some political matters that I really don't want to mention here, going elsewhere in Europe, as Niloo said, is 10000000 times harder, otherwise yes we'd have done ANYTHING to be together... anyways I'm not here to convince someone who judges me and thinks we haven't done enough to be together.

I have already sent my answers to Ankara, and we're just waiting for their next step. Hopefully if they still have concerns they'd call us for an interview. The officer just sent us a 2 lines question, he didn't state that he's not satisfied with the evidences or anything like that (in my initial application I didn't mention anything about why we never decided to go to another country to marry, I didn't know it was necessary) so I'm hoping for the bests.

Again I really truly appreciate all your comments, giving me info and sharing your opinions and all. Cheers

 

[Erina]

Sorry I think some people here are misunderstood. We are not anti-marriage or against it. Yes it's just a piece of paper and we don't mind it at all. We even have plans to get married once my partner lands here. Why we didn't get married and applied as spouse? Because we were not able to. We just want to be together, without that marriage certificate or with it. We don't really care. It would have been a lot easier to get married, yes, and we tried to do so but it was impossible, due to Iranian rules and regulations, as well as well as political issued we have to travel to a third country for marriage.

 

[Erina]

I'm gonna be honest, this sounds like it will be an uphill battle. From an outsiders perspective, it sounds like you just don't wasn't to get married or live together because it would inconvenience your lives. Unfortunately CIC doesn't care about what works best for you. They figure if you two are really in love you will move heaven and earth to be together. So you have to prove them wrong. Take out all the emotions and look at things from their viewpoint, and go from there. Good luck though, hope it all works out for you both.

Thanks dear.

 

[computergeek]

I was browsing CanLii. I came across this one, which is obviously a difficult case. It deals with the "right not to get married" as well.
http://canlii.org/eliisa/highlight.do?text=conjugal+sponsorship&language=en&searchTitle=Search+all+CanLII+Databases&path=/en/ca/irb/doc/2006/2006canlii52352/2006canlii52352.html

This is an interesting case. Indeed, it is a same-sex relationship and that was one of the original reasons for introducing the "conjugal" class in the first place - it replaced the H&C process that had been used to allow same-sex couples to immigrate to Canada. The appellant was successful and the decision specifically cites to the inappropriate nature of the VO's inquiry into their reasons for not getting married. While I'm not sure it is any more applicable to the OPs case than the case to which PMM cited, it does demonstrate some important points, not the least of which is that conjugal relationships are very challenging for CIC - most are refused.

I do think that the OP has a difficult job ahead of her, and if nothing else, the discussion in this thread should help her appreciate that. BCgirl2012's suggestion about researching cases in CanLii is a good one - I'd suggested it before but not specific search terms to use.

I do get the sense that the OP intends on marrying - but to do so here in Canada, with the full support of her family and her community. Conjugal class is not a "fiancé" visa class, but I do get the sense that if CIC were to grant her partner a visa to come to Canada to marry, she would do it. Indeed, that might be a good line of argument: "if you think I should get married to him, grant him a TRV so that he may come to Canada and we can marry here". Requiring that they both travel to a separate country simply so they may marry against the wishes of family does push the limits of what is reasonable.

The VO may very well decide that they just haven't tried hard enough. In that case, the path forward is simple - appeal the decision. Her partner would normally be granted a TRV to attend the hearing. They can then get married, in Canada. It's a very painful way to grant a TRV, but perhaps that will be the best resolution. They can then go into their hearing and show they are now married. Problem solved, everyone gets what they want.

 

[Erina]

This is an interesting case. Indeed, it is a same-sex relationship and that was one of the original reasons for introducing the "conjugal" class in the first place - it replaced the H&C process that had been used to allow same-sex couples to immigrate to Canada. The appellant was successful and the decision specifically cites to the inappropriate nature of the VO's inquiry into their reasons for not getting married. While I'm not sure it is any more applicable to the OPs case than the case to which PMM cited, it does demonstrate some important points, not the least of which is that conjugal relationships are very challenging for CIC - most are refused.

I do think that the OP has a difficult job ahead of her, and if nothing else, the discussion in this thread should help her appreciate that. BCgirl2012's suggestion about researching cases in CanLii is a good one - I'd suggested it before but not specific search terms to use.

I do get the sense that the OP intends on marrying - but to do so here in Canada, with the full support of her family and her community. Conjugal class is not a "fiancé" visa class, but I do get the sense that if CIC were to grant her partner a visa to come to Canada to marry, she would do it. Indeed, that might be a good line of argument: "if you think I should get married to him, grant him a TRV so that he may come to Canada and we can marry here". Requiring that they both travel to a separate country simply so they may marry against the wishes of family does push the limits of what is reasonable.

The VO may very well decide that they just haven't tried hard enough. In that case, the path forward is simple - appeal the decision. Her partner would normally be granted a TRV to attend the hearing. They can then get married, in Canada. It's a very painful way to grant a TRV, but perhaps that will be the best resolution. They can then go into their hearing and show they are now married. Problem solved, everyone gets what they want.

I do agree with every line you wrote here. I'm sure we'll win an appeal if our case gets refused. Consequences are another painful year of being apart and stressed. Do they really grant TRV for attending the hearing? Because normally today, chances of getting TRV for Iranians is almost 0.

 

[computergeek]

I do agree with every line you wrote here. I'm sure we'll win an appeal if our case gets refused. Consequences are another painful year of being apart and stressed. Do they really grant TRV for attending the hearing? Because normally today, chances of getting TRV for Iranians is almost 0.

Actually, I've seen exactly this happen in at least one other conjugal case. It's related to procedural fairness - that one cannot have procedural fairness if one cannot attend the hearing at which the tribunal is making decisions about one's fate. So the outland partner received a TRV and they married here in Canada before their IAD hearing. Since IAD is allowed to consider new material, they presented evidence they had married now that the barrier to do so had been overcome and as far as I know their appeal was granted.

 

[Erina]

Actually, I've seen exactly this happen in at least one other conjugal case. It's related to procedural fairness - that one cannot have procedural fairness if one cannot attend the hearing at which the tribunal is making decisions about one's fate. So the outland partner received a TRV and they married here in Canada before their IAD hearing. Since IAD is allowed to consider new material, they presented evidence they had married now that the barrier to do so had been overcome and as far as I know their appeal was granted.

Oh wow. Interesting!!!