Hello everyone, hope all is well. I submitted my citizenship application about 1.5 years ago and already passed the citizenship test. Recently IRCC sent me an email to request for my police certificate in 30 days. Per the citizenship application guide on IRCC website, people need to provide a police certificate from each country, other than Canada, if they were there
- in the past 4 years
- for 183 days or more in a row
- since the age of 18
In my case, I don’t need to provide police certificates as I didn’t stay in any countries other than Canada for 183 days or more in a row in the past 4years. I was wondering if it‘s a scam. Does anyone have the similar situations?
Thanks in advance.
While I am late responding to this query, and assuming the source is legitimate, as already answered YES, if IRCC requests the applicant provide a PCC from this or that country, the applicant needs to do that or provide an accurate, truthful explanation why a PCC cannot be obtained and submitted.
If a PCC cannot be obtained and submitted within the time frame of the request, the applicant should respond acknowledging the request, explaining why a PCC is not available within the time requested, truthfully state that they have begun the process to obtain a PCC, and that they will submit it as soon as available.
NOTE: if IRCC requests a PCC, that basically (with some exceptions) means the applicant is required to submit a PCC. Additionally, certain applicants are required to submit a PCC WITH their application, in order to make a complete application. But any and all applicants can be required to submit a PCC if IRCC requests it (again, subject to some exceptions).
FURTHER OBSERVATIONS:
Of course an applicant should examine the request to discern whether it is from a legitimate source. This is usually fairly easy to do.
As I noted, any citizenship applicant can be asked to provide a PCC from another country. And this can be requested from an applicant even though the applicant did not need to provide a PCC with their application.
Some examples, among others, why a citizenship applicant might get a PCC request:
-- there was an extended period of time abroad prior to applying, even if not a full six months
-- the applicant was involved in an actual criminal case or matter abroad
-- the applicant should have included a PCC with the application but didn't
-- -- failed to check "yes" in 10.b. even though they were in another country for 183 or more days in a row
-- -- gave an insufficient explanation, or reason, for not including a PCC
-- a PCC was included but was insufficient because applicant was in that country after that PCC was issued
-- applicant has been living abroad after applying
These are just examples among other reasons why IRCC might ask an applicant to submit a PCC while their citizenship application is in process.
REMINDER: the underlying requirement is to establish the applicant has no prohibitions, including no criminal charges or convictions in another country during the relevant time periods (four years prior to the citizenship application, and right up to the day the oath is taken).
The latter leads to . . .
There is no need for verifying all passport pages when they can simply check the travel records at the key stroke with the help of cbsa but still they go to extreme trouble by waiting and asking the candidates to provide just to check the travel records(when many dont get entry stamp nowadays even for air travel and these passport copies are useless). Still officers requests for it which heavily waste their time and surely months of our time.
They dont need to ask for residence proofs when they can simply check cbsa records if one is insde the country during that speified duration as they just need to make sure we are inside, not to be worried if i stayed at one place and which address etc. This is not part of eligibility.
All these things were mandatory to verify residences and travel logs when cbsa didnt have record of land crossing etc about 20 years ago. But still officers keep on having the same age old procedures and now they still go with these procedures without any necessity even after rules have long been changed on eligibility. Earlier they used to keep on referring to supervisor on issues and govt changed it along the way to avoid delays but now the delay is happening within the first level itself. Seems no training or officers seems ignore it when it comes to eligibility verification. Processing will be lot faster if they just simply stick to current rules.
To be clear, the current rules require the applicant PROVE all the eligibility requirements are met. Fortunately, IRCC will indeed check sources itself and verify much of what is necessary for a grant of citizenship, and not impose a demand on the applicant to more fully prove these things.
To also be clear, the CBSA travel history cannot prove actual presence in Canada. The CBSA travel history can be incomplete for a variety of reasons (contrary to protests otherwise). Sure, for most applicants it is complete, and the applicant knows it is complete. But it is not necessarily so. Canadian border control is a lot like swiss cheese, full of holes.
In the meantime, if IRCC is sufficiently satisfied the travel history the applicant has reported is accurate and complete, IRCC makes an inference the applicant was actually physically IN Canada the days between a known date of entry and the next reported date of exit.
But since leaving and entering Canada is not like checking in and out of a secured facility (like a prison), there is ONLY ONE for sure source for all dates of exit and dates of entry. That is the individual traveler, the PR, the applicant. Them and ONLY THEM. They are the ONE and ONLY person there each and every time they exited, and every time they entered Canada.
So IRCC will conduct various checks, and cross-checks, to identify if there is any
reason-to-question the applicant's reported travel history. Including CBSA databases. Including cross-checking the applicant's address and employment history. Including cross-checking information found in passport pages (and NO, it is absolutely false that IRCC can get an applicant's full travel history from CBSA; the most obvious example: CBSA will not have a record of all the countries a PR visited during any given trip outside Canada, which applicants are required to disclose by listing them in addition to the destination country for any given trip during the relevant eligibility period).
So here's the rub, what applicants should understand: even if what IRCC finds in cross-checking the applicant's information about travel history is that the applicant was likely IN Canada more than the applicant reported in the presence calculation, that can be a reason to question the applicant's physical presence, resulting in a request for additional evidence, for PROOF of the applicant's presence, and if the applicant fails to submit sufficient additional proof, that is grounds to deny the application. That is, in other words, information indicating an applicant was IN Canada more than the applicant reported can be a reason to deny the application . . . if that information raises questions about the reliability of the applicant's account and the applicant fails to follow through with sufficient proof.
(And yes, there is an actual case, reported in a Federal Court decision, where evidence indicating an applicant was in Canada during a period of time the applicant reported being outside Canada lead to questioning the reliability of her reported travel history, and ultimately to her application being denied when she failed to submit adequate evidence to convince a Citizenship Judge she was in Canada enough to meet the requirements.)
Basically it comes down to this: if IRCC has reason to conclude it cannot rely on the ONE BEST source of information about a person's travel history (that being individuals themselves), the applicant will need to more thoroughly PROVE their presence in Canada. That can and often will require proof of presence in between a known date of entry and next reported date of exit from Canada. Not really all that complicated.
IRCC will not analyze a person's CBSA travel history to establish they met the presence requirement. IRCC will, in contrast, look at the CBSA travel history to see if there is a discrepancy which casts doubts on the applicant's account of their travel history.
No one should be expecting more from IRCC's screening of the CBSA databases, or any other sources, than that. IRCC will not put together the information needed to show the applicant's presence . . . the burden of doing that is on the applicant.
The rules about this have NOT changed. The law imposing the burden on the applicant has been consistent for nearly a half century. No sign this will be changing.
Some may wax and whine about how in the modern day the government's own records are complete, but again the reality is that Canadian border control is a lot like swiss cheese. It has a lot of holes. There is little or no prospect the law or the rules will change in regards to the citizenship applicant's burden of proof about physical presence. Not anytime soon.
