No PR card need to travel

[Renstr]

Australian here, needed to fly to europe next week. I know most people here are saying that you can travel without a travel document, but I was almost denied boarding from QANTAS when flying back to Canada to get my PR activated. I have a one way ticket to the States booked for next month, should i just print that and take that as my intent to leave canada if this airline decides to be difficult too?

 

[kateg]

As a Permanent Resident, you need a travel document or card to return (commercially).

As a visitor, Australia does not require a visa, so a visitor can come without that formality.

Sometimes, it can be in one's best interest to tell the airline that you are a visitor, but the border that you are a P/R.

 

[canuck_in_uk]

Australian here, needed to fly to europe next week. I know most people here are saying that you can travel without a travel document, but I was almost denied boarding from QANTAS when flying back to Canada to get my PR activated. I have a one way ticket to the States booked for next month, should i just print that and take that as my intent to leave canada if this airline decides to be difficult too?

Don't tell the airline that you are a PR. They may refuse to board you without the PR card or a PRTD. Most airlines don't have an issue with visa-exempt visitors travelling to Canada on a one-way ticket but some can kick up a fuss. The ticket to the USA should be sufficient in place of a return ticket if the airline has any issues boarding you.

 

[cempjwi]

Australian here, needed to fly to europe next week. I know most people here are saying that you can travel without a travel document, but I was almost denied boarding from QANTAS when flying back to Canada to get my PR activated. I have a one way ticket to the States booked for next month, should i just print that and take that as my intent to leave canada if this airline decides to be difficult too?

I just read this on the CIC website and I wonder how they really plan to enforce it.

Starting March 15, 2016, if you are a permanent resident of Canada and a citizen of a visa-exempt country, you will need to travel with your Canadian permanent resident (PR) card or PR travel document when flying to Canada. Otherwise, you may not be able to board your flight to Canada.

 

[PMM]

Hi

I just read this on the CIC website and I wonder how they really plan to enforce it.

Starting March 15, 2016, if you are a permanent resident of Canada and a citizen of a visa-exempt country, you will need to travel with your Canadian permanent resident (PR) card or PR travel document when flying to Canada. Otherwise, you may not be able to board your flight to Canada.

1. Because most visa exempt visitors will be required to apply and receive and ETA to fly to Canada. If a PR (who doesn't have a valid PR card or doesn't meet the residency requirements) applies for an ETA, the system should so that they have PR status and the ETA would be refused. At that point they will need to get a TD to travel to Canada.

 

[dpenabill]

Australian here, needed to fly to europe next week. I know most people here are saying that you can travel without a travel document, but I was almost denied boarding from QANTAS when flying back to Canada to get my PR activated. I have a one way ticket to the States booked for next month, should i just print that and take that as my intent to leave canada if this airline decides to be difficult too?

I do not quite grasp what the situation is underlying this query, or why in particular this traveler has no PR card.

Perhaps the rules themselves best illuminate the course to navigate:

The rules require a Canadian PR to present either a valid PR card or a PR Travel Document in order to board a flight destined to Canada. Relative to this, the rules do NOT distinguish travelers with a visa-exempt passport from those whose passport is not visa-exempt. Technically both are required to display either a valid PR card or a PR Travel Document in order to board a flight destined for Canada.

Scores and scores of PRs report easily skirting the rules by simply displaying a visa-exempt passport to the airline at the time of boarding. So many have reported this, and this is repeated so often by others, some observers conclude that this is in effect the de facto rule, that a traveler with a visa-exempt passport can simply board a flight destined for Canada by displaying such a passport. Some are a little more cautious and note that it may be important for the traveler to avoid revealing, to the airline, that they are a Canadian PR.

The absence of reports by anyone being denied boarding in this situation has long suggested this is indeed a de facto rule, of sorts anyway.

The OP's query hints there may be exceptions.

Moreover, with the eTA requirements looming on the near horizon, to be fully in effect early next year, there is a distinct possibility that this way of skirting the rules may be coming to an end.

Thus, I echo PMM's observation.

But I do so with the caveat that we do not really know what parameters or criteria the eTA process will screen for beyond the obvious: visa exempt travelers flagged for security, criminality, or previous status/admissibility issues.

That is, my guess is that it will identify travelers who have PR status, and the rules already require PRs to present a valid PR card or PR Travel Document in order to board a flight destined for Canada, so may indeed deny eTA for PRs with visa-exempt passports.

And while that is a guess, my guess, it is a guess acknowledging that as the eTA system is fully implemented it may not be structured to deny existing PRs eTA. Even if, however, this is not a part of how the eTA process works immediately, it is only a matter of time before that functionality is incorporated. Which is to say, even if it does not work this way next year, it is likely to eventually work this way, to in effect deny eTA to PRs so that PRs must display either a valid PR card or a PR Travel Document.

In the meantime, however, it would not be the least bit surprising if the government and airlines pursue other avenues for more strictly enforcing the rule that a PR must display a valid PR card or PR Travel Document in order to board a flight destined for Canada. Continued enhancements of technology and trends in policy are continually expanding the scope of enforcing existing rules. This is largely across the board. Ways to game the system are shrinking. This particular common mode of skirting the rules, of relatively easily cheating the system, is undoubtedly going to become less easy, less common. It is more a matter of when this will happen, not if.


Note about PRs claiming to come to Canada to visit:

Again, I do not quite grasp the full nature of the OP's query, but I have the impression it alludes to claiming the purpose of the trip is temporary. I am not much familiar with this in the context of interactions with the airlines in the boarding of the flight. I can see it arising for a traveler relying on a visa-exempt passport who has a one-way ticket, for some airlines in some locations, given the prospect that a visa-exempt traveler may be denied entry into Canada at the POE if it appears the purpose is not to merely visit, which a one-way ticket might indicate. But this would have little or nothing to do with the traveler being a PR.

At the POE, however, it appears to be common practice for officers to give PRs a pass, without conducting an interview about residency or issuing a 44(1) Report, if it appears the PR is only visiting, is only coming to Canada temporarily. In the recent past CIC has adopted procedures to facilitate a more efficient surrender of PR status so that this can be more formally accomplished without compromising enforcement of the PR Residency Obligation, but there are still reports indicating, especially for travelers carrying visa-exempt passports, border officers allowing PRs to enter without residency obligation screening or reporting when the traveler's purpose or plans indicate a short visit.

To be clear about this, however, it warrants noting that the PR who makes an overt show of coming to Canada temporarily but who actually does not intend to leave Canada as claimed, is making a material misrepresentation to a Canadian officer in connection with obtaining entry into Canada. Scores of people have been doing this for a long, long time. That does not make it any less a serious violation. And, to be clear, going forward many such travelers are likely to have a FOSS note entered into their record, and when that individual later applies for a new PR card or applies for citizenship, or to sponsor a partner, whatever, there is a significant chance it will pop up and be recognized as an instance in which this individual has made material misrepresentations in the past. Even if no action is taken on the misrepresentation per se (after all, it would be an easy defense to say one changed their mind after they were in Canada, so Canada is not likely to attempt to prosecute for the alleged misrepresentation itself), this is something which could lead CIC personnel to perceive the individual cannot be trusted to give truthful information. Compromised credibility is perhaps one of the most common causes of problems. This could haunt a PR's dealings with CIC for some time to come.

Recent changes to the law have increased the scope and severity of making misrepresentations to CBSA or CIC. Changes in policy and enhancements in technology make it more likely misrepresentation, or even apparent misrepresentation, will be spotted by the government. Thus, as easy as it has been, in the past, to play a bit of games with CIC or CBSA, the stakes are getting more serious, and the odds of getting away with it are going down.

 

[stuntmonkeybc]

His query is plain as day, not entirely sure why you needed to write that long winded reply? He has an expired PR card, he needs to travel. Has an Australian passport and is visa exempt.

I'm also visa exempt, and was grilled pretty hard for my PR card when boarding a flight to Toronto from Dublin. I eventually showed it to them, but as a visa exempt passport they didn't seem to care. That said, on the CIC website:

Canada’s entry requirements are changing
Starting March 15, 2016, if you are a permanent resident of Canada and a citizen of a visa-exempt country, you will need to travel with your Canadian permanent resident (PR) card or permanent resident travel document when flying to Canada. Otherwise, you may not be able to board your flight to Canada. Permanent residents who are citizens of visa-required countries will continue to need to show their PR card when boarding a flight to Canada.

So in actuality, he is not "skirting" the system. Until the 16th of March 2016 he can board a flight to Canada without his PR card and enter as a visitor. Whether entering as a visitor or not affects his ability to continue working/immigration status etc I have no idea.

 

[dpenabill]

His query is plain as day, not entirely sure why you needed to write that long winded reply? He has an expired PR card, he needs to travel. Has an Australian passport and is visa exempt.

I'm also visa exempt, and was grilled pretty hard for my PR card when boarding a flight to Toronto from Dublin. I eventually showed it to them, but as a visa exempt passport they didn't seem to care. That said, on the CIC website:

So in actuality, he is not "skirting" the system. Until the 16th of March 2016 he can board a flight to Canada without his PR card and enter as a visitor. Whether entering as a visitor or not affects his ability to continue working/immigration status etc I have no idea.

The rules are specific and they require PRs to display either a valid PR card or a PR Travel Document prior to boarding a flight destined to Canada.

Airlines do not strictly enforce this rule, because the airlines typically rely on any valid travel document which on its face authorizes entry into Canada, which a visa-exempt passport does.

As your experience reflects, there are indications this is changing, that there is likely to be more strict enforcement of the rules going forward.

The fact that a PR possesses a visa-exempt passport does not authorize the PR to travel to Canada as a visitor. A PR can only enter Canada legally as a visitor by first surrendering PR status.

Pretending to not be a PR and displaying alternative documents is deliberately an attempt to skirt the rules. Just because it is common, and commonly gotten away with, does not change its character. The trend, though, is clear: skirting the rules is becoming increasingly difficult, and likely to become far more difficult going forward. Brave New World some might say. But it is the way it is.

The prudent course for PRs is to be aware of the direction enforcement is heading and make decisions accordingly.

 

[canuck_in_uk]

The rules are specific and they require PRs to display either a valid PR card or a PR Travel Document prior to boarding a flight destined to Canada.

Pretending to not be a PR and displaying alternative documents is deliberately an attempt to skirt the rules. Just because it is common, and commonly gotten away with, does not change its character.

Seems AirCanada is not aware of this supposed rule:

http://www.aircanada.com/en/travelinfo/before/traveldoc.html#a-int

Only Canadian permanent residents from non visa-waiver countries travelling outside Canada are required to carry a valid Canadian permanent resident (PR) card or a valid visa, in addition to a valid passport, to return to Canada.


Also seems that CBSA isn't aware of this supposed rule, as they advise that visa-exempt travellers without PR cards can travel to Canada on the strength of their passports as if they were visitors and give such travellers no troubles on entry.

 

[cempjwi]

Hi


1. Because most visa exempt visitors will be required to apply and receive and ETA to fly to Canada. If a PR (who doesn't have a valid PR card or doesn't meet the residency requirements) applies for an ETA, the system should so that they have PR status and the ETA would be refused. At that point they will need to get a TD to travel to Canada.

True, thanks. So before this regulation, the upper hand was on the visa-exempt citizens, who after lapsing on their RO could fly back to Canada as tourists, enter the country happily if not questioned, and then they can reinstate their RO. Except Americans (always except Americans), all visa-except citizens will need an ETA, which will be denied based on the PR status, forcing them to apply for a TD that will be denied if they have not met their RO. A loophole is being closed and in the process it is an attempt to improve the lack of balance between visa-exempt and visa-required PR's. The loophole continues to exist, however, for PR's that are visa-required citizens (who don't need an ETA). If they have an expired PR card they should apply for a TD; however, many, knowing they have lapsed on their RO, choose to fly to the US (if they have a visa) and then cross the land border using their COPR. I am sure not all of them are successful on the quest to re-enter without questioning, but I don't feel that without closing that loophole Canada's immigration system (and citizenship) are strong enough.

 

[cempjwi]

Seems AirCanada is not aware of this supposed rule:

http://www.aircanada.com/en/travelinfo/before/traveldoc.html#a-int

Only Canadian permanent residents from non visa-waiver countries travelling outside Canada are required to carry a valid Canadian permanent resident (PR) card or a valid visa, in addition to a valid passport, to return to Canada.


Also seems that CBSA isn't aware of this supposed rule, as they advise that visa-exempt travellers without PR cards can travel to Canada on the strength of their passports as if they were visitors and give such travellers no troubles on entry.

Below that there is another section on the same page that says:

Permanent resident (PR) cards

All Canadian permanent residents travelling outside Canada are required to carry a valid Canadian permanent resident (PR) card or a valid visa, in addition to a valid passport, to return to Canada by commercial carrier. The PR card provides proof of your immigration status. Without it, you will not be allowed to board the carrier back to Canada. Canadian citizens do not need a PR card.

This is what gets me. As a visa-exempt citizen, a Canadian PR (whether the PR card is expired with or without a lapsed RO) enters Canada as a tourist, and by that action legally being conferred a particular immigration status in Canada, with a limited stay. A PR has a legal immigration status whether in Canada or outside Canada, or not? A non-PR visitor only acquires an immigration status as it enters Canada. However, PR's that enter Canada as tourist using their visa-exempt citizenship passports indeed are technically in Canada under two different immigration statuses. Should the visa-exempt citizen overstay under the tourist immigration status, there are no consequences enforceable because that citizen is a Canadian PR. If CBSA maintained a well documented track of exits instead of just entries, if the same citizen should leave Canada a year after he/she entered and attempted to re-enter Canada again with their visa-exempt citizenship passport, wouldn't that raise hell with the CBSA agent? I can only imagine the drama it unfolds.

It could be said that the same applies to a dual citizens who had lost his/her Canadian passport abroad and is returning to Canada on a non-Canadian visa-exempt citizenship passport (although technically they MUST enter with their Canadian passport but there is no law preventing the person from not doing it). However, Canadian citizens do not have an immigration status associated with Canada (even if they did in the past). Therefore, a Canadian citizen that enters Canada as a tourist does not have a dual immigration status while in Canada. I think this all too wild that a Canadian citizen is subject to an immigration status in Canada at any point. I know a Canadian citizen raised in the US who never had a Canadian passport, used a US passport to visit Canada and thus was subject to Canadian immigration law.

Btw, I am curious about this. Let's say a person with an expired PR card and an RO not met comes back to Canada on a visa-exempt passport to try reinstate their RO before they apply to renew their PR card. How can that person get a job with an expired PR card? I mean, don't you have to show your PR card to gain employment?

 

[dpenabill]

My observations below are about requirements and practices for PRs boarding flights destined to arrive in Canada. What happens in POE screening is a separate discussion. At the POE, PRs are entitled to enter Canada if they establish identity and status, with proof of identity usually sufficing to establish status. Beyond that, whether there is additional customs or admissibility or criminality screening and issues is totally dependent on the specific individual; even citizens are subject to such screening. But again, what is involved at the POE is separate and distinct from the issue about boarding a flight, and I address only the latter.

Seems AirCanada is not aware of this supposed rule:

http://www.aircanada.com/en/travelinfo/before/traveldoc.html#a-int

Only Canadian permanent residents from non visa-waiver countries travelling outside Canada are required to carry a valid Canadian permanent resident (PR) card or a valid visa, in addition to a valid passport, to return to Canada.


Also seems that CBSA isn't aware of this supposed rule, as they advise that visa-exempt travellers without PR cards can travel to Canada on the strength of their passports as if they were visitors and give such travellers no troubles on entry.

The very same web page you link and quote also states:
Permanent resident (PR) cards

All Canadian permanent residents travelling outside Canada are required to carry a valid Canadian permanent resident (PR) card or a valid visa, in addition to a valid passport, to return to Canada by commercial carrier. The PR card provides proof of your immigration status. Without it, you will not be allowed to board the carrier back to Canada. Canadian citizens do not need a PR card.

Either way, however, both statements there refer to Air Canada's practice, and as emphasized below, to the extent its practice has allowed PRs to board flights by presenting visa-exempt passport, it is highly likely this is about to change. At the least, CIC is overtly stating so, that pursuant changes attendant implemention of the eTA process, "Starting March 15, 2016, if you are a permanent resident of Canada and a citizen of a visa-exempt country, you will need to travel with your Canadian permanent resident (PR) card or PR travel document when flying to Canada. Otherwise, you may not be able to board your flight to Canada."


General Observations:

As I have noted, to date airlines typically screen passengers boarding flights destined for Canada, requiring them to display a proper Travel Document which on its face authorizes entry into Canada. For this purpose, displaying the visa-exempt passport generally suffices, and many Canadian PRs have reported doing so without a problem.

But for Canadian PRs this is a matter of practice and does not strictly comply with the rules and regulations which prescribe that Canadian PRs are obligated to display either a valid PR card or a PR Travel Document.

The point of my previous posts is that this practice is about to change, that sooner (probably March 2016) or later (but in the near future) the rules will be more strictly applied.

And make no mistake, erroneous references to the contrary, common practices to the contrary, the rule is that to board a flight destined for Canada, PRs are obligated to show either a PR card or a PR Travel Document.

As to citing and quoting the primary source of the rule itself, that requires getting into cross-referenced IRPA and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, and gets complicated. For those interested, further down I will cite and link the applicable statutes and regulations. In the meantime, however, many government web pages state the rule quite clearly, albeit in an informal, informational format.

And, to be clear, these government sources uniformly and consistently state that the rule is simply that to board a flight destined for Canada, PRs are required to show either a PR card or a PR Travel Document.


CIC publicizing pending changes:

Multiple Canadian government sites, including multiple CIC web pages, display the following:

Canada’s entry requirements are changing

Starting March 15, 2016, you will need to travel with your Canadian permanent resident (PR) card or permanent resident travel document when flying to Canada. Otherwise, you may not be able to board your flight to Canada.

If you do not currently have a permanent resident card and are in Canada, find out how to apply for a permanent resident card.

If you are outside Canada and do not have a PR card or your card is expired, find out how to apply for a permanent resident travel document.

This includes, among others:

CIC page regarding what is needed to visit Canada as a tourist

and this page: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/helpcentre/answer.asp?q=605&t=10

There are other government sites reiterating the rule, such as:
http://travel.gc.ca/travelling/documents/permanent-resident-card, where it states, regarding the PR card: "This wallet-sized plastic card is used by all permanent residents of Canada seeking to re-enter Canada on a commercial carrier (airplane, boat, train or bus). If you leave the country, you are expected to have this card when you return to Canada."

This is what gets me. As a visa-exempt citizen, a Canadian PR (whether the PR card is expired with or without a lapsed RO) enters Canada as a tourist, and by that action legally being conferred a particular immigration status in Canada, with a limited stay. A PR has a legal immigration status whether in Canada or outside Canada, or not? A non-PR visitor only acquires an immigration status as it enters Canada. However, PR's that enter Canada as tourist using their visa-exempt citizenship passports indeed are technically in Canada under two different immigration statuses. Should the visa-exempt citizen overstay under the tourist immigration status, there are no consequences enforceable because that citizen is a Canadian PR. If CBSA maintained a well documented track of exits instead of just entries, if the same citizen should leave Canada a year after he/she entered and attempted to re-enter Canada again with their visa-exempt citizenship passport, wouldn't that raise hell with the CBSA agent? I can only imagine the drama it unfolds.

Regardless of what travel documents the PR uses to board the flight or presents to the POE to obtain entry into Canada, a PR only has PR status. No other status is conferred. In particular, a PR is not a Foreign National and temporary resident status (including visitor status as a tourist) can only be given to Foreign Nationals. This is why I said in my earlier post that a PR can only legally enter Canada with visitor status after surrendering PR status.

Note, too, that purpose of travel and status are different things. A PR living abroad may indeed visit Canada, but that does not affect the PR's status, which remains that of a PR.

While historically many, many have skirted the rules by using a visa-exempt passport, or by traveling via the U.S. and arriving at a land crossing POE, the extent to which PRs in breach of the PR Residency Obligation will continue to get away with this is likely to be reduced substantially going forward.

My understanding of the "changes are coming" notices CIC is including on its information pages is that the eTA process will not approve the visa-exempt passport of a PR. Not certain this is part of the plan immediately, but it appears it will be, and if not immediately, then soon.

It would be interesting for a PR with a visa-exempt passport to simply apply now for the eTA and report on what happens.

By the way, the extent to which CBSA and CIC are tracking the coming and going of PRs is definitely increasing. They may never rely on their tracking for things like citizenship applications or even PR card renewals, but they are definitely increasing the extent to which they compare the applicant's information with their records.

Btw, I am curious about this. Let's say a person with an expired PR card and an RO not met comes back to Canada on a visa-exempt passport to try reinstate their RO before they apply to renew their PR card. How can that person get a job with an expired PR card? I mean, don't you have to show your PR card to gain employment?

Some employers may request proof of status. Many will only require the SIN card.

Sometimes an expired PR card can be used for proof of status within Canada. For example, OHIP (the Ontario health care coverage) allows use of an expired PR card to show status (up to five years as I recall).





Addendum Re Applicable Statutes and Regulations:

(For those who are interested in the specific provisions of law (statutes and regulations) which specify the requirements for commercial carriers screening boarding passengers)

As noted, citing and quoting the primary source of the rule itself requires getting into cross-referenced provisions in IRPA and the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations. This gets a bit complicated. The essential primary authority, however, comes down to the following:
-- Section 148.(1)(a) in IRPA, which prohibits a commercial carrier from carrying anyone who does not hold a "prescribed document"
-- Section 259 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, section 259.(a) and 259.(f) in particular, which list the PR card (259 (f)) and a PR Travel Document (259(a)) as prescribed documents.
-- NONE of the other "prescribed documents" (set out in 259 (b) through 259 (e)) are applicable to Canadian Permanent Residents.

For clarity, 259(c) references the prescribed document (document to be presented for purposes of boarding a flight destined to Canada) we generally refer to as a visa-exempt passport, by referencing Section 52(1) of the Regulations, but this regulation explicitly applies to "a foreign national seeking to become a temporary resident" and this does not include Canadian Permanent Residents.

To be clear, it is Section 2.(1) IRPA which specifically states the following:
"'foreign national' means a person who is not a Canadian citizen or a permanent resident, and includes a stateless person." I quote this, again, to emphasize that the provisions which allow an airline to board passengers displaying a visa-exempt passport limits this to foreign nationals . . . and PRs are NOT foreign nationals.

Which again is not to dispute what has been common practice. But it is to emphasize that what is allowed in practice can be changed (and is likely to change) without making any changes to the applicable rule, as the applicable rule already prescribes that PRs need to show a PR card or PR TD.


By the way, ENF 15:

Much of this is also outlined in the Operation Manual ENF 15 Obligations of Transporters, which goes into additional aspects of the airline's obligations in screening passengers. Note, though, CIC has not been fully maintaining the operation manuals, and this particular one is many years out of date. It serves as a fair outline of what is involved, and citations to authority are still useful.

 

[Lammawitch]

For what it's worth:

I've traveled to and from Canada many times, over many years, as a PR on a visa-exempt passport.

*Not* once has an airline *ever* asked to see my PR card/proof of PR status in Canada.

Of course, with the introduction of the ETA, this will change, I imagine.

 

[kateg]

Pretending to not be a PR and displaying alternative documents is deliberately an attempt to skirt the rules. Just because it is common, and commonly gotten away with, does not change its character. The trend, though, is clear: skirting the rules is becoming increasingly difficult, and likely to become far more difficult going forward. Brave New World some might say. But it is the way it is.

The prudent course for PRs is to be aware of the direction enforcement is heading and make decisions accordingly.

I would like to point out that there are two separate issues at stake here:

1) What the airline is told
2) What the government is told

As far as the airline is concerned, their job is to avoid bringing people to Canada who will just be turned around. Their internal policies do not have the force of law.

As far as the government is concerned, their job is to enforce the law. One should be absolutely honest with them.

Sometimes, the airlines have stupid policies, or their policies which work normally can lead to absurd outcomes. As an example:

I am a US Citizen. This means I have the right of entry into the United States.
I have a US passport card. This is a government-issued photo identification document that is proof that I have the right of entry.
I also have a NEXUS card. This is a government-issued photo identification document that is also proof that I have the right of entry, as it lists my Citizenship as US.

Both of these documents are perfectly acceptable for entering the United States by land or air. Both of these documents are acceptable and meet all legal obligations imposed upon the airline.

WestJet, however, has a policy of only permitting passports. Despite the fact that I have lawful status, and have met all legal requirements (and provided them sufficient information to meet theirs), they still will not permit me to fly to the United States with both of those documents.

In this situation, if I were a Canadian citizen, I could pull out my Canadian passport and they would let me travel to the US as a "visitor". This is an absurd outcome. As soon as I landed at the airport, the US would have no problem admitting me as a Citizen.

In a case like this, it would make sense to circumvent the airline-imposed policy in the interest of avoiding an absurd result. This is not immigration fraud, nor is it an intent to circumvent the immigration laws in question.

 

[kateg]

Seems AirCanada is not aware of this supposed rule:

http://www.aircanada.com/en/travelinfo/before/traveldoc.html#a-int

Only Canadian permanent residents from non visa-waiver countries travelling outside Canada are required to carry a valid Canadian permanent resident (PR) card or a valid visa, in addition to a valid passport, to return to Canada.

Also seems that CBSA isn't aware of this supposed rule, as they advise that visa-exempt travellers without PR cards can travel to Canada on the strength of their passports as if they were visitors and give such travellers no troubles on entry.

That will change next year, but is the case right now. When traveling to the Canada from the US (for example), the kiosk will ask for return ticket information. When none is provided, it will flag and require an operator. The operator is then supposed to select "visa-waiver" country, which will then permit checkin to proceed.