So she has to necessarily put that in the history address section for last 5 years (2014?). There is absolute clarity, as it is within the last 5 years. But PCC is not applicable with application.
PCC in the past 4 years or since age of 18?
- Thread starter uppperkut
- Start date
Sorry I didn't understand what you meant.
What I'm saying is that in her application, her address history will show she was in Qatar for over 6 months before moving to Canada. But, she travelled on short visits out of Qatar at that time (which broke the 183 days in a row rule), however there's no indication of that anywhere in her application.
As per the PCC requirement, it doesn't matter how many days you stayed in a country other than Canada ...what matters is did that stay exceed 183 in a row ever (since 18 years). But for address history, except for "Vacation" time all other addresses must be reported for the past 5 year period.
Age is NOT relevant here, given that the individual was clearly more than 18 while living in the other country.
Otherwise, if the applicant checks "NO" in response to Item 10.b., it is NOT necessary to include a police clearance from any country.
If the applicant checks "YES" in response to Item 10.b., the respective country needs to be listed in the chart provided AND then the applicant needs to either --
-- provide an explanation why a police clearance cannot be submitted OR why it is NOT necessary based on one of the exceptions (country of origin, or a scenario similar to Example 1), OR
-- include a police clearance from the respective country
-- include a police clearance from the respective country
Query after query in this forum comes at this issue from the wrong direction, focusing on whether a police clearance is required rather than focusing on how to properly, best, most honestly answer Item 10.b. and following the instructions about providing an explanation or clearance if the appropriate answer is "YES."
In particular, it warrants remembering that it is the "YES" response to Item 10.b. which triggers the application requirement to submit a clearance from the respective country UNLESS one of the exceptions apply (country of origin exception or a scenario covered by Example 1). Whether to check "YES" or "NO" in response to item 10.b. does NOT depend on whether the applicant is required to submit a clearance. It works in the opposite direction. The proper response to Item 10.b. is a factual question about the individual's personal history and it calls for an HONEST declaration based on the applicant's best understanding of what the question asks.
Can one honestly say, based on some brief excursions to other countries, they were NOT in a particular country for 183 or more days in a row even though they were LIVING in that country for more than six months? I suppose reasonable individuals can differ about this.
However, Example one in the application help refers to having "lived" in a country rather than referring to being actually physically present in that country. That's a clue. And that is what makes sense. After all, it is not as if the precise number of days in the other country makes much difference in the applicant's qualifications for citizenship. Item 10.b. is about applicants who have spent enough time in another country to warrant requiring the applicant to objectively document, upfront WITH the application itself, that the applicant has NO prohibitions related to criminal charges or convictions within the preceding four years, and to do this by submitting a clearance WITH their application (unless an exception applies). All other applicants are merely required to personally affirm (in Item 16) they have no charges or convictions in another country that would constitute a prohibition.
In any event, how the applicant responds to Item 10.b. will determine whether a police clearance must be included in order to make a complete application which will be processed by IRCC. If the applicant checks "NO," then no police clearance needs to be included. For this part of the application, that gets the application past the completeness check.
A "NO" response passes the completeness check even if that is NOT an accurate answer. Of course there may be repercussions later in the process depending on how inaccurate the "NO" response was and also depending on why the applicant responded "NO" in contrast to an IRCC official determining otherwise.
BUT THE ODDS ARE THERE IS NO NEED TO PARSE WHETHER BRIEF ABSENCES BREAK THE "IN A ROW" COUNTING OF DAYS and JUSTIFY A "NO" RESPONSE . . .
It warrants noting that since it is very likely a clearance from Qatar was submitted in the PR process, and the indication is there has NOT been travel back to Qatar since coming to Canada, thus no police clearance should be required even if "YES" is checked in response to Item 10.b.
Thus, there should be no need or reason to quibble about whether the application instruction about days "in a row" means brief absences from the other country interrupt the counting of days so that it is OK or even appropriate to check "NO," even though the individual was residing in the other country for more than six months. In most situations similar to this, the applicant will have included a clearance during the immigration process (attendant becoming a PR), and thus as long as the applicant has not returned to that country since landing, all the applicant needs to do is check "YES" and then list Qatar in the chart on the application form, and in the explanation box state something to the effect "Police Clearance provided with PR application and no return to Qatar since landing."
PARSING DAYS "IN A ROW" and BRIEF EXCURSIONS OUTSIDE THE COUNTRY:
For someone who was LIVING in the other country long term and for more than six months (more than 183 days) within the relevant four years, despite this or that brief trip outside that country, it is likely the best, most honest response to Item 10.b., and certainly the more forthcoming response, is "YES." And this is supported by Example 1 in the application help which refers to having "lived" in France (for a period of time longer than six months; in the example it refers to a "year") rather than to having been present in France for more than six months of days "in a row."
I am not clear why @uppperkut said, in response to the examples quoted by @JPBless, that "None of these cover her case."
The France example appears to apply (not the country of origin example), even though --
-- it is Qatar rather than France, AND
-- the period of time the individual "lived" in Qatar prior to landing, and within the previous four years, was 8 months (thus more than 183 days) and not precisely a "year (365 days)"
-- the period of time the individual "lived" in Qatar prior to landing, and within the previous four years, was 8 months (thus more than 183 days) and not precisely a "year (365 days)"
Again, note that Example one refers to having "lived" in the other country, France, rather than being present in the other country for 183 or more days. Note as well that it states the applicant will "need to provide a police certificate from France if [the applicant] did not provide one with [his or her] immigration application." To my view this is the example that best approximates the situation presented here, and suggests that the proper response to Item 10.b. is "YES."
But sure, some may quibble that living in a country for more than six months is NOT the same as being "in a country or territory other than Canada for 183 days or more in a row" (this being the language used in the application for Item 10.b. currently) IF, if in particular, the individual took trips outside that country during that time. A "NO" response might even fly, not just past the completeness check, but through the rest of processing as well. Worst case scenario is IRCC later requests a police clearance, resulting in some delay in processing, and some risk the total stranger bureaucrat evaluating the application might have a negative impression of the applicant.
Thank you so much for the detailed response.
Regarding the stay in Qatar, yes she was living there. I agree with you that the answer should be YES if you lived in a country other than Canada for 6+ months during the past 4 years. Which is why I did not think that trips outside your country of residency would break the 6 month period.
Now whether her PCC from Qatar is valid or not, I understand that her PCC is valid if she submitted one with her application and did not travel back to Qatar after becoming a PR (Referring to the France example).
What if she did soft landing? I know she didn't, but I'm asking this question for myself actually since I will have a very similar case to her's in the future.
I landed in Canada on Oct 1st 2017, but then I moved back to Dubai and lived there for a few months before moving to Canada permanently in May 2018. I was living in Dubai for several years before the soft landing. So it's:
Dubai (several years) > Canada (2 weeks soft landing) > Dubai (8 months) > Canada (Permanent)
Does moving back to Dubai after becoming a PR mean that my PCC from Dubai (submitted in my application) is no longer accepted?
You're absolutely right. I completely missed the fact that 10.b. has "If yes" in the second paragraph. So if you answered NO, nothing needs to be filled in the table.
Regarding the stay in Qatar, yes she was living there. I agree with you that the answer should be YES if you lived in a country other than Canada for 6+ months during the past 4 years. Which is why I did not think that trips outside your country of residency would break the 6 month period.
Now whether her PCC from Qatar is valid or not, I understand that her PCC is valid if she submitted one with her application and did not travel back to Qatar after becoming a PR (Referring to the France example).
What if she did soft landing? I know she didn't, but I'm asking this question for myself actually since I will have a very similar case to her's in the future.
I landed in Canada on Oct 1st 2017, but then I moved back to Dubai and lived there for a few months before moving to Canada permanently in May 2018. I was living in Dubai for several years before the soft landing. So it's:
Dubai (several years) > Canada (2 weeks soft landing) > Dubai (8 months) > Canada (Permanent)
Does moving back to Dubai after becoming a PR mean that my PCC from Dubai (submitted in my application) is no longer accepted?
Last edited:
Follow up question to my last post:
Since I will be answering YES to 10.b. either if my Dubai PCC is valid or not, why does the application only mention (since the age of 18) in the second paragraph of 10.b. and not repeat the 4 year period? They only care about the last 4 years only, right? (Meaning that I don't need to worry about any other PCCs before the 4 years, say from my country of origin which is Egypt)
If yes, list each country or territory in the chart below. You must provide a police certificate for each country or territory where you have been present for 183 days or more in a row (since the age of 18). If you cannot get a police certificate, tell us why below.
Since I will be answering YES to 10.b. either if my Dubai PCC is valid or not, why does the application only mention (since the age of 18) in the second paragraph of 10.b. and not repeat the 4 year period? They only care about the last 4 years only, right? (Meaning that I don't need to worry about any other PCCs before the 4 years, say from my country of origin which is Egypt)
If yes, list each country or territory in the chart below. You must provide a police certificate for each country or territory where you have been present for 183 days or more in a row (since the age of 18). If you cannot get a police certificate, tell us why below.
Last edited:
SHORT ANSWER: Yes, going back to the country (other than country of origin) for which a "YES" response to Item 10.b. was necessary, due to length of stay in that country within the preceding four years, will require a new police certificate.
LONGER MORE DETAILED EXPLANATION:
If a police clearance is required it needs to be one that was issued within the previous six months OR issued since the last time the individual was in that country.
For citizenship applicants, the current application form has some exceptions for applicants who check "YES" and otherwise would need to provide a clearance. For PRs who answered "YES" based on a period of time in their country of origin PRIOR to landing, the form explicitly states that the applicant is NOT required to provide a police certificate. This does not appear to depend on no travel back to the home country since landing. But a reasonable reading of this suggests that this exception does NOT APPLY if there was a period of six months plus in the home country AFTER landing. Which is what makes sense.
In contrast, where time in a country other than country-of-origin triggers the "YES" response, there is no specific instruction that states the applicant is not required to submit a clearance. But as I discussed in some depth in my previous post, Example 1 indicates that for a six plus month period prior to landing no police certificate is required IF a certificate was submitted with the immigration application AND the individual "did not travel" to that country after becoming a permanent resident.
This is the long way of saying that just going back to the country, AFTER landing, let alone actually living in the country after landing, means that a currently valid police clearance needs to be included in the application. And thus the certificate needs to have been issued within the preceding six months OR at least since the last time the individual was in that country.
The language in the application is a bit truncated but its meaning is clear enough. Yes, it is still ONLY about being in another country within the FOUR YEARS prior to making the application.
A TANGENT OBSERVATION:
There is a wholly different discussion which one could have about interpreting and applying instructions in the citizenship application. It can get complicated. The crux of it, however, is that much of what is asked in the application is a matter of administrative policy NOT definitive rules. Initially I actually considered responding in this topic not to offer what I did in my previous post but to address a much broader observation about this, to caution that it can be a mistake to focus too intently on parsing the literal language in the form and instructions, a mistake to give too much weight to what is thought to be the *precise* requirement.
I do not mean to pursue that tangent now. I will note, however, much of the earlier discussion in this topic tended to focus too intently on identifying a precise requirement which really is not at all precise and not about a definitive requirement, but rather about an administrative policy governing what constitutes a complete application.
A police clearance is NOT a qualifying requirement for citizenship, for example. The related qualifying requirement is that an applicant have no criminal charges pending and no criminal convictions within the preceding four years, including in any other country.
For a long while CIC and IRCC considered a total of 183 days in another country as reason to require a police clearance WITH the application, even if that derived from multiple relatively short periods of time spent in that country. I do not remember if it was late last year or early this year that IRCC revised their POLICY and amended the application form to require a police clearance be submitted WITH the application only from applicants who spent 183 or more days IN A ROW in another country.
But ultimately it does not really matter how long the individual spent in another country (except for calculating the presence requirement itself). If and when IRCC requests a police clearance is simply a matter of administrative policy. Current policy triggers the instruction to include a clearance if the applicant spent 183 or more days IN A ROW in another country, but also allows IRCC to request a clearance from any applicant regardless how much time was spent in another country.
For example, if a Canadian PR is arrested for a crime during his one and only weekend trip to the U.S., that must be disclosed in the application (Item 16; or by notice of a change in information if the arrest takes place after applying while the application is still pending, even after a decision has been made), and IRCC will review whether it constitutes a prohibition. Such an individual may quite likely be asked to submit a police clearance from the U.S. FBI even though he only spent one weekend, total, in the U.S. Not with his application but later in the process. Possibly right up to when the oath is taken.
dpenabill, thank you so much again for the detailed response.
Makes sense to provide a PCC if you lived in a country after landing, it was my gut feeling that you have to all along.
The goal is to avoid having to submit a PCC later on and delay the process of course, so this is why I wanted to make sure my friend is sending everything requested from the start.
Makes sense to provide a PCC if you lived in a country after landing, it was my gut feeling that you have to all along.
The goal is to avoid having to submit a PCC later on and delay the process of course, so this is why I wanted to make sure my friend is sending everything requested from the start.
Absolutely right decision as they will in all probability later ask...though they cannot technically deny AOR / returning the application as incomplete .
I am kinda stuck with same situation ,
From the required 4 years
3.5 years = Inside Canada (Jul 2017 - Mar- 2021).
0.5 years = Outside Canada in Kuwait (Jul 1988- Jul 2017) But that's my country of origin, before I immigrated to Canada
Do i need to provide Police Clarence again ?
If so I'm gonna be in trouble, as I can't travel back to Kuwait..
From the required 4 years
3.5 years = Inside Canada (Jul 2017 - Mar- 2021).
0.5 years = Outside Canada in Kuwait (Jul 1988- Jul 2017) But that's my country of origin, before I immigrated to Canada
Do i need to provide Police Clarence again ?
If so I'm gonna be in trouble, as I can't travel back to Kuwait..
The situations are a bit different as my friend is not from Qatar. You do not need to provide a PCC because in the application, it says:
Note: If you were in your country or territory of origin immediately prior to becoming a permanent resident and landing in Canada and this time falls within this four (4) year period, you are not required to provide a police certificate. Please indicate this in the explanation box.