Well, after four attempts and me moving to China for the past four months, my wife was granted a visitor visa to Canada. We were honest and told them straight up that she is applying for a six month visa, will apply for permanent residency once she arrives, so that I can return to Canada and resume my employment and once I officially retire in a few years, we hope to leave Canada and never see the place again, because I hate Canada. I expressed my serious concern for the lack of honesty demonstrated by previous visa officers and noted clearly that my wife has no interest or desire to be in Canada for any reason other than to be with me, because she has a higher quality of life in China than Canada could ever offer her, but she is willing to be there so long as I am in Canada.
I fully appreciate that a visa officer can deny a person for reasons of suspicion that they will not return to their hone country, in which case they only have to check box number one, "You have not satisfied me that you would leave Canada at the end of your stay...." This is legal under the act and nothing else needs to be said.
To go on and misrepresent information to further justify the decision made is wrong and under the word and spirit of the law, is defined as fraudulent activity in accordance with the Criminal Code of Canada. The Criminal Code is very clear in stating to misrepresent information for the denial of a service is considered fraudulent activity.
In the past my wife was told that she did not have enough funds to support herself on a visit to Canada, and yet was able to prove a $250,000 net worth, with over $100,000 CAN in the bank, along with a long track record of where the money came from, in addition to proof of ownership and a home and vehicle with no debts against them. To deny this as insufficient financial resources is a complete misrepresentation of the information submitted, and could be considered an error in law, if not out right fraudulent misrepresentation of information submitted.
On the past four denials, she was told that she had insufficient international travel to be trusted as a visitor to Canada, and further noted that she only demonstrated minor regional travel. In fact, over the past three years she traveled internationally five times and three times involved traveling to a different hemisphere. To say she only had regional travel is a complete misrepresentation of the extent of her international travel. Furthermore, it really does not matter if a person travels to a neighboring country or half way around the world. Once a person steps foot on foreign soil and returns home without incident, and followed all the laws of the host nation, they have proven his/her trust as an international traveler, and to do this five times increases the trust level beyond reproach. It is completely wrong to misrepresent information submitted to substantiate a point. Immigration Canada expects people to be honest with them and in turn, they should present the same level of honesty back that they expect from applicants.
She was also told that she had insufficient proof of being well established in China. Yet she demonstrated a net worth in China of $250,000, ownership of a home, ownership of a car, family in China that she cares for, and a job she has held since 1989 as a Director of HR, along with a supporting notarized letter from her supervisor in English and Chinese granting leave from work for her travel and noting the start and end time of her approved leave. Based on this information, to deny based on the grounds that she is "not well established" is a complete misrepresentation of evidence submitted.
I fully recognize that too many people have misused the system to access to Canada, but at the same time, we are a nation that boosts Rule of Law." We are better than this as a country, or at least we should be. Canada is recognized around the world as an example of honesty and integrity, and yet the first contact many people like my wife have with Canada is to be treated with suspicion based on what other people similar to her have done in the past (almost sounds racist), and to misrepresent information submitted to justify a decision.
I would have much more respect for the process if they would simply state: "While all the criteria have been demonstrated regarding ties to your homeland, financial resources and previous travel, you are denied because I don't believe the true purpose of your trip." Simple and honest, nothing more and nothing less.
Everyone who feels they had a file that misrepresented facts submitted should consider doing what I did. Write a formal complaint to your member of parliament, the embassy where the decision was made and Immigration Canada and clearly note that you are not challenging the decision, but rather the statements made in support of the decision, because the statements were either intentionally or unintentionally a complete misrepresentation of the facts submitted, and under the Criminal Code of Canada such conduct could be regarded as fraudulent.
I ask nothing more from the system than it be honest, and considering the high regard by which Canada is held in the world, we should expect nothing less.
