SPOUSAL PUBLIC POLICY

[boasorte]

I will keep everyone posted as it goes along. However, under the public policy, being out of status is not a crime but rather a violation of the IRB act and as it states in the policy eventho the individual is considered inadmissable, he is still considered under the public policy.

The IO was not the one who released my husband but an immigration judge did under the grounds that he has has ties to the community and they don't believe he's a flight risk. I am unable to post the link to the policy here.

The CBSA officer feels that it would be of his discretion if he allows the application to proceed. He will also allow us to make submissions as well.

Everything on our application matched exactly what happened and I knew within a few months of dating my husband of his status just didn't know what to do about it.

On the other hand, ignorance of the law is not an excuse and I have accepted responsibilty and is trying to fix it. It is also very true what they say that it's a case by case situation.

I am sorry to hear about what you are going through... Everything you said make sense... Any out of status person can indeed apply under the new policy as long as they meet all the other requirements of the class(other than Legal Status Requirement) and one of the "others" requirements is that the applicant is not being the subject of a removal order.

Since your husband had a removal order against him at the time you filed your application, this removal order makes him ineligible to apply.

And since his removal order is from 2003, he had been given as a 'fugitive' by CIC, that's why they are in a hurry to deport him.

For more information read, IP8 Spouse or Common-law partner in Canada Class, I am pretty sure you will find all your answers there. Read it carefully !
Best of luck!

 

[confusedwife]

Thank you and I get that.

But after reading the policy (and maybe I am just reading it wrong): The reason for my husband's removal order was for overstaying his visa which refers to Lack of Status under the policy.

“Lack of status” does not refer to any other inadmissibilities including:

• persons under removal orders or facing enforcement proceedings for reasons other than the
above-noted lack of status reasons.

 

[rjessome]

Here is a link to the Public Policy regarding sponsoring spouses via the inland route who don't have legal status in Canada at the time of the application:

http://users.resist.ca/noii-van.resist.ca/spousal_sponorship.html

Please read Section F carefully:

F. ADMINISTRATIVE DEFERRAL OF REMOVAL
The Canada Border Services Agency has agreed to grant a temporary administrative deferral of removal to applicants who qualify under this public policy. The deferral will not be granted to applicants who:

Are inadmissible for security (A34), human or international rights violations (A35), serious criminality (A36), or organized criminality (A37);
Are excluded by the Refugee Protection Division under Article F of the Geneva Convention;
Have charges pending or in those cases where charges have been laid but dropped by the Crown;
Have already benefited from an administrative deferral of removal emanating from an H&C spousal application;
Have a warrant outstanding for removal;
Have previously hindered or delayed removal; and
Have been previously deported from Canada and have not obtained permission to return.

Since your husband had a warrant for removal issued prior to your inland application, he is not eligible for the deferral of removal as stated in the Public Policy. As you have indicated, there are significant Humanitarian & Compassionate considerations in your case which I am sure your lawyer is pleading to the nth degree. However, it is at the discretion of the IO to choose to exercise the removal or not.

This is a very serious situation and I am very sorry for you and your family. You need to pray that your lawyer has excellent powers of persuasion AND that the IO will seriously consider the H&C factors in your situation. I wish you LUCK because you really need it. The law is not on your side in this situation so I'm hoping you get some "heart" and Christmas generosity.

 

[confusedwife]

Thank you very much!!

How do I find out who the IO is? Is it the same person as the CBSA officer? Cuz, he's the one handling the file now.

 

[rjessome]

Sorry, I'm using IO and CBSA officer interchangably. Yes, same person.

 

[confusedwife]

Ok thanks again. I appreciate it.

 

[Oil Sand Guy]

Thank you and I get that.

But after reading the policy (and maybe I am just reading it wrong): The reason for my husband's removal order was for overstaying his visa which refers to Lack of Status under the policy.

“Lack of status” does not refer to any other inadmissibilities including:

• persons under removal orders or facing enforcement proceedings for reasons other than the
above-noted lack of status reasons.

confusedwife

do not let yourself to get confused.
I am here to assist and help as I can , so do not take me wrong. I have been through a lot during my journey and fight with CIC. Your story has more to add, more behind what you know or what you are allowing us to know. Over-staying or no status, DOES allow candidates to apply inland yes. But no status, in order to convince and succeed, should be simple and straightforward OVER-STAYING and for a short period. I think you know the truth. Why did you post all details in the other forum while giving half the truth in this forum?
I don't wish to hurt you at any point. In fact I wish I could have agreed with you. But I guess you know very well, that a big RED FLAG must be naturally raised for someone who has been out of status since 2002. Something was going wrong here

 

[confusedwife]

Oil sand Guy,

There's no half truth to anything, sorry if I mislead in anyway. Was justing pointing certain parts. The other post from that other forum was my first one. I am desperate for answers and guildelines hence why I am here. I also know that not disclosing EVERYTHING will lead to gaining nothing! So please don't get me wrong.

You have quoted my orginal post and that is exactly what it is. I can advised that the same concerns I have were raised by the lawyer who made me copies of the manual. According to the CBSA officer, he will look into it further as to whether or not it would be at his discretion and our lawyer asked that he allows time to make submissions for a deferral for a possible TRP if necessary.

On my 1st meeting with the CBSA officer, they do not want to encourage persons to remain in Canada and wait for their status - they should go home! What if I told you that at that time, he also said, he saw our application and it would not affect it in anyways?

I actaully don't need you to agree with me and I need the honest truth as well so I know what to expect. Afterall, it's humans that assess these files and not computers - so they are prlly saying the same things you are.

 

[confusedwife]

@ oil and sand guy,

I have personally know of situations where persons have been out of status longer than my husband have been, trust me when I say this and in some case, they didn't even have an application submitted. So, I will tell you what they told me - it all depends on the officer you get.

Red Flag? Never crossed my mind! I was playing it by other people's experience but no one ever tells you everything about their situations.

 

[prof456]

@confusedwife, the difference is that there is already a warrant for arrest for your husband...that's the twist!

 

[Oil Sand Guy]

@ confusedwife, the difference is that there is already a warrant for arrest for your husband...that's the twist!

Exactly

Plus:

Applying inland while out of status, is no gauarantee for retaining the status. While it is allowed and while some applicants were successful, it is still NO Guarantee for STOP (Stay) of Removal.
I have known more complicated cases, compared to your husband's case, and they were successful because it just happened. I have known case with misrepresentation and even frauds and they passed. But the fact is: "once CIC or CBSA put someone (certain applicant) in their mind, then that is it..they keep going on and on and the case will be glued into their system. Be realistic

 

[confusedwife]

Exactly

Plus:

Applying inland while out of status, is no gauarantee for retaining the status. While it is allowed and while some applicants were successful, it is still NO Guarantee for STOP (Stay) of Removal.
I have known more complicated cases, compared to your husband's case, and they were successful because it just happened. I have known case with misrepresentation and even frauds and they passed. But the fact is: "once CIC or CBSA put someone (certain applicant) in their mind, then that is it..they keep going on and on and the case will be glued into their system. Be realistic

I have chosen to be hopeful instead...and I will keep going on and on as well. I know my options and separting my family is not one of them, I'm sorry. I am 28 years old and met my father 2 years ago for the first time. The wait time for outland app. is Jamaica is 15 months! Again, not an option for me!!

 

[confusedwife]

@ confusedwife, the difference is that there is already a warrant for arrest for your husband...that's the twist!

understood. But, according to the policy, you don't think it's going around in circles? Or is there a specific order here? As I read it, there is alway s a warrant issued once a person overstay a work permit. It's tuff when all you have left is luck and hope

Adminsitrative Deferral vs Stay or Removal?

I promise to keep y'all posted.

In the meantime, any Deferral allowed rulings By the Fed Crt related to or close to my situation?

 

[prof456]

I think you are assuming that there is a warrant of arrest for every individual that overstays. That's not true.

I certainly wish you goodluck...at least they should be lenient enough to let your husband stay for the holiday. Where is he from?

understood. But, according to the policy, you don't think it's going around in circles? Or is there a specific order here? As I read it, there is alway s a warrant issued once a person overstay a work permit. It's tuff when all you have left is luck and hope

Adminsitrative Deferral vs Stay or Removal?

I promise to keep y'all posted.

In the meantime, any Deferral allowed rulings By the Fed Crt related to or close to my situation?

 

[confusedwife]

GOOD NEWS UPDATE

today, CBSA granted the deferral of removal on our application. I proved my case! My husband DID qualify under the public policy and should have been given consideration at the beginning. Our application is back to processing and CIC will have answer for us within 60 days.

Also, to confirm; the timeline of how long a person has been out of status really has nothing to do with it. I know most people thought my case was extreme, I smile now looking back. When you really want something, you have to fight for it and the truth is always better. In the words of the CBSA officer " well done, have a merry Xmas"

Prayer works as well. Thank you Lord. Best Xmas present ever. My girls are happy, my husband is happy, I am happy. Merry Xmas everyone!