On this official page at the bottom, it says we need to inform IRCC if we leave Canada for more than 2 weeks in a row.
https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/canadian-citizenship/become-canadian-citizen/after-apply-next-steps.html
I did not know of this rule before. Will going to my home country on a vacation impact my application processing time? Does anyone know about this or have informed IRCC about their extended vacation plans and have still fallen under the normal processing times?
It is not a "
rule," but advice. It is stated more in the nature of what applicants "
should" do, not what applicants "
need" to do, let alone what an applicant "
must" do.
But the reference to this as "
official" warrants drilling a little deeper into IRCC's online information. And acknowledging that there is often some ambiguity in the information IRCC provides. I will elaborate, but upfront it warrants noting that the webpage you link says to contact IRCC if, for example, "
you are charged with a crime," in the same way and in the same list as it says to contact IRCC if there is a "
plan to leave Canada for more than 2 weeks in a row."
THESE ARE NOT EQUAL. NOT close, NOT even similar. It is mandatory to notify IRCC if you are charged with a crime, and a failure to do so can constitute a misrepresentation (by omission).
So, first . . . The information provided by IRCC online is not "
official." It is of course useful information provided by an authoritative source, generally accurate, and for the most part it can be relied on. And to a large extent, it is the best source of information for Canadian PRs applying for citizenship about the process of applying for citizenship. Or, as I often say,
when in doubt, follow the instructions; otherwise, yep, follow the instructions.
The forms obtained through links at the site are official.
Distinguishing between an "
official" source, versus a government source that is "
authoritative," may seem like quibbling, perhaps even petty. In most contexts, for most questions, the difference does not matter or does not matter much; again, the online information can be, generally, not just usually but almost always relied on to be accurate.
But sometimes the difference matters.
The important difference is that to the extent there is any conflict, discrepancy, or inconsistency between what is stated in the online information versus what the statutes and regulations require, or more commonly versus how official tribunals (like the Federal Court) interpret and apply the statutes and regulations, it is the statutes and regulations, and their interpretation and application by the courts, that govern. Again, this does not generally pose an issue for the vast majority of citizenship applicants.
Where this can make a difference, and fairly often does make a difference, and why I bring it up, are situations in which there is a tendency to interpret the online information more broadly or otherwise in a more self-serving way, than how the rules and practices actually work.
One of the biggest sources of erroneous extrapolation, and thus potential pitfalls, involves information in regards to what an individual "
may," or "
might" do, or what "
may," or "
might," happen. Likewise information referring to what an applicant "
should" do, which sometimes is little more than a recommendation, but other times is about actions that are required.
Bringing this, finally, to "
travel" outside Canada while a citizenship application is pending. For purposes of a PR working and living in Canada making occasional trips abroad after applying (I did that several times in the relatively short eight months it took between the date my application was submitted and the date I took the oath), there is typically zero impact on processing the citizenship application. To the extent there is a risk, the risk is logistical, such as either missing a communication or something happening interfering with returning to Canada in time for a scheduled event.
So, obviously, the scope of such risk varies widely; generally the longer a PR-applicant is abroad, the more the risk of missing communications or failing to return in time to attend a scheduled event, and of course the logistics of getting back to Canada with short notice depend on where in the world outside Canada one is located. Spending weekends in Seattle or Detroit, in the U.S. and a short drive back to Canada, does not involve the same degree of risk as, say, spending months in locations some distance from major urban areas in Iran or Pakistan.
IRCC makes no such distinctions in what it advises. As others noted, IRCC online information has long advised citizenship applicants to notify IRCC if they travel abroad for more than two weeks. But as long as the applicant timely responds to communications from IRCC and appears for scheduled events, and appropriately discloses their location for things like online tests, interviews, or the oath, the advice to notify IRCC is only, in effect, "
advice," not mandatory, not a requirement.
But as I alluded above, it is also worth taking a closer look at this advice. It pops up in several IRCC webpages, and more than once in some, including the page you linked . . . where in addition to it being near the bottom of the page, under a section about when to contact IRCC, it is also stated in the dropdown information for leaving Canada after applying (mid-page).
As I noted above, this advice is listed alongside other information about when to contact IRCC. This is about what is posted by IRCC here:
https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/canadian-citizenship/become-canadian-citizen/after-apply-next-steps.html
It states:
While we process your application, contact us if any information on your application changes or if you
-- change your address
-- plan to leave Canada for more than 2 weeks in a row
-- can’t check your application status online and the normal processing time for your application has passed
-- are charged with a crime
This includes some redundancy. If the applicant changes address or is charged with a crime, those constitute a change in information in the application which the applicant is not only responsible for notifying IRCC, but which the applicant has certified they agree to advise IRCC of any such changes (it is part of the signature block in the application).
There is nothing in the way IRCC frames this information that alerts an applicant of the difference between notifying IRCC of a plan to leave Canada for more than two weeks, which is
not mandatory,
versus notifying IRCC the applicant has been charged with a crime, which is mandatory, and which can be considered misrepresentation that could lead to the application being denied and the person prohibited from citizenship for five years, or if not discovered until later, grounds for revocation of citizenship. In between these two is the information an applicant should notify IRCC of a change in address; this too could be misrepresentation by omission but is rarely prosecuted as such.
OVERALL: the online IRCC information is very useful but it often does not tell the whole story. I have not gone into the details here, but the online information is prone to being out-of-date when there are changes (PR card and PR TD application information, for example, continues to be a bit of a mess relative to the new forms implemented in June).
Beyond that, there is a contingency of forum participants who deliberately conflate "
travel" abroad, for which there are the logistical risks already mentioned,
versus living and working abroad after applying, which has those same logistical risks and some procedural risks as well. In regards to this it is still not clear whether or not, or the extent to which the historically elevated risk of non-routine delays still affects a significant percentage of those who are not merely traveling abroad but are abroad for extended periods of time.
