Interesting article about residency questioning at the border

[robfis]

Anybody read this article? It's not a new one and may have been discussed here, but I thought it would be interesting to bring it up. If it's true, especially the excerpt below, then passing the border check should not be an issue.

http://www.londonimmigrationlawyers.ca/index.php?page=the_permanent_residence_card

"The border officer is allowed to ask you how long you have been away from Canada, but you are not obligated to reply. Any information you give to the officer can, and will, be used against you to assess whether you have breached the residency obligations (2 years in Canada in the past 5). It is difficult, but important, to tell the border officer that you are not required to answer questions relating to your residency obligations but, as a Canadian Permanent Resident, you have an absolute right to enter Canada."

 

[Leon]

Interesting but this article does not even mention the possibility of being allowed to enter but being reported for being in breach of the RO at the same time. I would be willing to bet that the odds of getting reported are much higher if you meet the IO with a stout "I don't have to tell you anything, now let me in" than if you were apologetic and admitted to having been outside Canada slightly longer than you should have but for a good reason.

 

[robfis]

Yes, I thought about the same myself. However, if they report you then they have to give you paperwork and the paperwork must be based on some facts, like your verbal statement. If they don't have your statement, then how can they report you? Based on your right to refuse to answer a question? Or maybe they would investigate on the spot? That would be hard too. Maybe there is something in this article...

 

[Leon]

Yes, I thought about the same myself. However, if they report you then they have to give you paperwork and the paperwork must be based on some facts, like your verbal statement. If they don't have your statement, then how can they report you? Based on your right to refuse to answer a question? Or maybe they would investigate on the spot? That would be hard too. Maybe there is something in this article...

I think they don't need anything to report you except their belief that you do not meet the RO.

The report might say that person arrived at the border/airport with an expired PR card or no PR card and refused to state how long they had been outside Canada. Immigration officer concludes that the person does not meet the RO. Therefore they are reported and up to them to prove that they meet the RO during their appeal.

I remember a poster on here who had been reported inspite of travelling to Canada on a regular basis. When she said she was outside for a year, she was telling the truth. The IO said they believe she doesn't meet the RO and they reported her.

 

[Msafiri]

You are meant to answer the questions put to you by the CBSA agent/ CIC truthfully. They can just put entries on FOSS to flag you each time you deal with immigration to include being sent to Secondary at each inspection...it would be interesting to see if there was a link between RQs for PR Renewals/ Citizenship and any border entry related issues.

 

[scylla]

I completely agree with Leon. I think refusing to answer will just put you on the fast track to being officially reported to meet with a judge on the suspicion you have failed to meet your residency obligation.

 

[Msafiri]

The CBSA agents can play hardball too - they will start asking you questions like where do you work, what is your business phone number, what is the name of your boss, how long have you worked there, how long were you gone, what day did you leave, which airline did you use, what was your route. As long as they can show they are checking that you are not in breach of the residence obligation then they can keep you at Secondary for some time...can't remember if they can require you to attend a CIC local office post border entry for a further review/ interview.