what happened to his Family of lose citizen or lose permanent Resident Status?

[nima_tajfar]

Hi ,

My question is according this rule what happened to person who lose his citizenship or a permanent resident who can't get citizenship because (he did a indictable offence charges , like theft over 5000$...) and his innocent spouse or his innocent family (who are Canadian citizen) don't wanna to leave Canada, i think according this terrible Rule ,if their spouse don't want to leave Canada , They should divorce forever (just because a theft over 5000$ or any other one time mistake like indictable offence charges. )

the part of The rule about terrorism is understandable but the other part about indictable offence and crime are not fair (although i believe one who is terrorist should go to jail for entire his life , because he might be dangerous for human kind in anywhere (not only in Canada) either in Canada or his home country , so deporting him to his country is not the best or the most fair action so they should have changed the law of court for punishment about terrorism not the law of citizenship)

but the other part of the law about indictable offences like theft over 5000$ ,... which prevent a permanent resident to get citizenship is not fair at all because instead of lose citizenship for one time charges , he already had punish by court, or went to jail, but this is totally unfair if he can't become a citizen because of one time charges! and again the question is what happen to a permanent resident family ( his innocent spouse , innocent child) who his husband only commit one time charges like theft 5000$ and his family are innocent so they all might leave the country!! i mean if he can't become a citizen and live in canada anymore because he commit a indictable offence once then this terrible law effect his entire innocent family to (who might be already a Canadian Citizen or will be Canadian Citizen...)

This law or similar of that is not execute in USA or any country in the world that i know. it's totally unfair and terrible law.

Furthermore , the law is fair if would be same for all people in society, so why First-tire Citizenship are privileged if they do any indictable offence or crime and their citizenship wouldn't be lose whereas second-tire citizen or permanent Resident are not privileged of same thing. This is against human Rights.

Kind Regards,
Peace,
Nima

 

[zardoz]

Re: Bill C-24 : what happened to his Family of lose citizen?

Hi ,

My question is according this rule what happened to person who lose his citizenship or a permanent resident who can't get citizenship because (he did a indictable offence charges , like theft over 5000$...) and his innocent spouse or his innocent family (who are Canadian citizen) don't wanna to leave Canada, i think according this terrible Rule ,if their spouse don't want to leave Canada , They should divorce forever (just because a theft over 5000$ or any other one time mistake like indictable offence charges. )

the part of The rule about terrorism is understandable but the other part about indictable offence and crime are not fair (although i believe one who is terrorist should go to jail for entire his life , because he might be dangerous for human kind in anywhere (not only in Canada) either in Canada or his home country , so deporting him to his country is not the best or the most fair action so they should have changed the law of court for punishment about terrorism not the law of citizenship)

but the other part of the law about indictable offences like theft over 5000$ ,... which prevent a permanent resident to get citizenship is not fair at all because instead of lose citizenship for one time charges , he already had punish by court, or went to jail, but this is totally unfair if he can't become a citizen because of one time charges! and again the question is what happen to a permanent resident family ( his innocent spouse , innocent child) who his husband only commit one time charges like theft 5000$ and his family are innocent so they all might leave the country!! i mean if he can't become a citizen and live in canada anymore because he commit a indictable offence once then this terrible law effect his entire innocent family to (who might be already a Canadian Citizen or will be Canadian Citizen...)

This law or similar of that is not execute in USA or any country in the world that i know. it's totally unfair and terrible law.

Furthermore , the law is fair if would be same for all people in society, so why First-tire Citizenship are privileged if they do any indictable offence or crime and their citizenship wouldn't be lose whereas second-tire citizen or permanent Resident are not privileged of same thing. This is against human Rights.

Kind Regards,
Peace,
Nima

You are completely mixing up different bits of legislation. However, I say that if you are denied the grant of citizenship or lose your PR status because of criminality, you have nobody except yourself to blame. If you hurt your family in the process, it's your fault...

 

[Cappuccino]

Re: Bill C-24 : what happened to his Family of lose citizen?

You are completely mixing up different bits of legislation. However, I say that if you are denied the grant of citizenship or lose your PR status because of criminality, you have nobody except yourself to blame. If you hurt your family in the process, it's your fault...

I also dislike the way the original poster trivializes stealing over $5000 as "just" and "one time mistake".

How does one MISTAKENLY steal over $5000? Did they accidentally walk into a bank with a gun and say "Give me $5000 or I shoot!" instead of "Can I please have a form to apply for a loan"? Slip of the tongue, perhaps?

Why it is unfair that Canada does not want such criminals?

As far as I understand it, if a person loses PR or citizenship because they committed a serious crime (and stealing over $5000 IS a serious crime, please do not attempt to make it sound trivial) then this ONLY affects the citizenship or PR of the offender, and does not affect the status of their family members. Once someone is a landed resident they are a PR in their own right.

That their family may want to leave the country with the offender is their choice but their own status (please someone correct me if I am wrong) would not be affected by this.

I don't consider such a law unfair or terrible. Canada is being nice enough to allow the person to live here, work here, become a citizen of here. It is a privilege, not a right. Those that abuse Canada's generosity have nobody but themselves to blame when the privilege of living and working here is taken away through reasons of criminality.


One reason native-born Canadian citizens are treated differently in this regard is to prevent a situation where someone ends up a citizen of nowhere. You seem to be suggesting Canada also revoke citizenships from native-born Canadians under such circumstances. If this makes them a citizen of nowhere, where do you suggest they go? Just dump them all in international waters?


I don't find this element of the law unfair or terrible. As they say, if you can't do the time, don't do the crime.

Cappuccino

 

[nima_tajfar]

Re: Bill C-24 : what happened to his Family of lose citizen?

You are completely mixing up different bits of legislation. However, I say that if you are denied the grant of citizenship or lose your PR status because of criminality, you have nobody except yourself to blame. If you hurt your family in the process, it's your fault...

I am not mixing different things , just take a look at bellow link , for the situation that prevent a permanent resident to become a citizen :
cic.gc.ca/english/citizenship/situations.asp

What you probably missed is each fault should have it's fair punishment , if somebody for example commit a theft over 5000$ (indictable offence) , The court would punish him for his mistake , he might go to the jail, but after his punishment would be done there should be no difference between him and other people in the society (especially if he would not repeat that crime) , What i really suggest they reconsider and review is current situation that prevent a permanent resident to become a citizen (the link is above for the situation) because Criminal got punished by court once. but nowhere in the world , there is such a law for preventing citizenship just because of indictable offence like Theft or robbery charges...

And what probably again you missed, the point is , if Criminality (like indictable offence) happen by someone , it's his fault , it's not his family fault , so he should go to jail or do any action or punishment decided by court , but preventing him to be a citizen is totally unfair and effect his innocent family life too. Just think a little bit about that.

 

[nima_tajfar]

Re: Bill C-24 : what happened to his Family of lose citizen?

I also dislike the way the original poster trivializes stealing over $5000 as "just" and "one time mistake".

How does one MISTAKENLY steal over $5000? Did they accidentally walk into a bank with a gun and say "Give me $5000 or I shoot!" instead of "Can I please have a form to apply for a loan"? Slip of the tongue, perhaps?

Why it is unfair that Canada does not want such criminals?

As far as I understand it, if a person loses PR or citizenship because they committed a serious crime (and stealing over $5000 IS a serious crime, please do not attempt to make it sound trivial) then this ONLY affects the citizenship or PR of the offender, and does not affect the status of their family members. Once someone is a landed resident they are a PR in their own right.

That their family may want to leave the country with the offender is their choice but their own status (please someone correct me if I am wrong) would not be affected by this.

I don't consider such a law unfair or terrible. Canada is being nice enough to allow the person to live here, work here, become a citizen of here. It is a privilege, not a right. Those that abuse Canada's generosity have nobody but themselves to blame when the privilege of living and working here is taken away through reasons of criminality.


One reason native-born Canadian citizens are treated differently in this regard is to prevent a situation where someone ends up a citizen of nowhere. You seem to be suggesting Canada also revoke citizenships from native-born Canadians under such circumstances. If this makes them a citizen of nowhere, where do you suggest they go? Just dump them all in international waters?


I don't find this element of the law unfair or terrible. As they say, if you can't do the time, don't do the crime.

Cappuccino

Well , if you see the link in my last post, you would get that even one time mistake ( if one is charged of indictable offence once and even if he is not convicted or even his charge is withdrawn (suppose as not guilty) this law might prevent him to get his citizenship, And the problem is they might add new charges (non-serious charges) to this situation list in future.

there are many defect about this situatio , just tell one of them here what if the charges is withdrawn and person suppose not guilty (because of psychiatry problem or diversion situation ...) when a new law is defined , all the situation should be consider. which in this law . seems not consider.

Also Those who landed before 11 June 2015 , and commit a crime before that time , were not aware of new law because the law define later , so it shouldn't involve past (them at least) which seems it does.... Sigh!

If somebody is not eligible to be a citizen of Canada , he should notice by the court , it's make no sense , that somebody could live in a place as Permanent Resident for 10 years (he could renew his permanent Resident 2 times each time for period of 5 years), and after paying taxes and working , and creating family there, he would not be able to live there anymore , just For one Time Criminal Charges! even Withdrawn one (which he suppose not guilty)...


about native-born Canadian citizens are treated differently in this regard is to prevent a situation where someone ends up a citizen of nowhere , i didn't suggest to dump them in international water. i just suggest to not define new rule or differences for other Permanent Resident or Second Tire Citizen too they should behave all people same, as i said, the Law , is fair if to be same for all people , so they can make no difference between Second Tire Citizen and Native-born Citizen by not define or executing such a law!

 

[jakifamily]

You raise a fair point about being judged twice. If someone has a file 'in process ' under the pre - June 2015 rules, where any outstanding prohibition would have been complete and conditions met, processing would continue normally. However a person will now be judged negatively given that as far as they were concerned they were qualified to apply at the time. It would be interesting to see what will happen to people caught up in this conundrum given that the rules changed when they have been already sent an aor before the rules changed. They are now on the 'backfoot' as it were having to qualify for something that was not stated on the application form or in law when they signed.

 

[Leon]

If your husband did something bad enough that his PR got revoked and he be asked to leave, he really has only himself to blame and the misfortune of your family is not caused by Canada immigration but by your husbands actions alone. In that case, it would be your choice if you stick by him and leave Canada in order to live with him in his homeland or whether you let him go and go on with your life in Canada.

To me it looks like you can't apply for citizenship if you are currently charged with / on trial for / appealing an indictable offense or if you have been convicted of one in the past 4 years before you apply. You can't apply either if you are in prison / on parole / on probation.

So if somebody commits an indictable offense but not bad enough to lose their PR, they can wait until they are out of prison, have completed their probation if any and more than 4 years have passed and then they can apply.

As for losing citizenship, you don't lose citizenship if you commit a crime. You can lose it if you are a dual citizen and are found guilty of terrorism or fight against Canada in a war and you can lose it if it comes out that you have lied on your immigration/citizenship application.

 

[jakifamily]

The green prohibition form that you sign twice, once at your test and again at your oath, states that if you have EVER been arrested, charged or have been on probation in the last 4 years you may not qualify (paraphrasing here ) to take the oath. That is completely different from the old forms as having fulfilled probation, you were entitled to take the oath

I wonder what happens to applicants who under the old rules only had to account for 3 years as per the application form at the time, also many people are arrested, charged and the arrest is deemed unlawful and charges dropped or found not guilty, negating any criminality, however CIC are looking to judge on people who are innocent. I wonder how CIC are going to address this for people who have been unfortunate enough to make a mistake in their life and have already fulfilled legal obligations by the courts etc. That means you cannot even take the test if you applied under the old system and are' in process' and have been caught up in the new rules which now covers everyone, regardless of when you applied.

Seems a pretty unfair and hastily thought out rule to me.

 

[itsmyid]

If your husband did something bad enough that his PR got revoked and he be asked to leave, he really has only himself to blame and the misfortune of your family is not caused by Canada immigration but by your husbands actions alone. In that case, it would be your choice if you stick by him and leave Canada in order to live with him in his homeland or whether you let him go and go on with your life in Canada.

To me it looks like you can't apply for citizenship if you are currently charged with / on trial for / appealing an indictable offense or if you have been convicted of one in the past 4 years before you apply. You can't apply either if you are in prison / on parole / on probation.

So if somebody commits an indictable offense but not bad enough to lose their PR, they can wait until they are out of prison, have completed their probation if any and more than 4 years have passed and then they can apply.

As for losing citizenship, you don't lose citizenship if you commit a crime. You can lose it if you are a dual citizen and are found guilty of terrorism or fight against Canada in a war and you can lose it if it comes out that you have lied on your immigration/citizenship application.

actions have consequences, there's nothing unfair about it, just like when you play slot machine you must know that's the money you may never win back, while the old lady next you may just get the jackpot, is it fair?

 

[jakifamily]

You are missing the point. What the OP mentioned and what I agree with is the fact that people who may have have been arrested but had charges stayed or acquitted? There is no crime or conviction here, what about the consequences of being wrongly arrested/charged? That can happen to anyone.

 

[nima_tajfar]

Or Somebody who is charged (indictable offense) but not found guilty (Charge is withdrawn) is suffering from the rule in 11 June 2015 and might not become a citizen (to me , if they reconsider this rule , and make it just for Convicted people not For Charged people is making more sense, because Convicted person are found guilty in the court , but charged people might not found guilty and the charge might withdrawn (because of psychiatry or diversion) or dismissed... these withdrawn charges might happen to all of us who are waiting for citizenship (found not guilty) and then we might not get our citizenship just because we are not found guilty , ... Sigh!

 

[jakifamily]

Yes Nimar_Tajfar, this is a whole new experience that has to be dealt with with clarity and fairness. Is CIC really expecting someone who has had charges dropped to wait an additional four years before applying??

 

[Leon]

Well , if you see the link in my last post, you would get that even one time mistake ( if one is charged of indictable offence once and even if he is not convicted or even his charge is withdrawn (suppose as not guilty) this law might prevent him to get his citizenship, And the problem is they might add new charges (non-serious charges) to this situation list in future.

According to the link you posted earlier:

Situations that may prevent you from becoming a Canadian citizen

To be eligible to become a Canadian citizen, you must not be prohibited under the Citizenship Act. As of June 11, 2015, you cannot become a citizen if you:

1. are in prison, on parole or on probation in Canada
2. are serving a sentence outside Canada
3. are charged with, on trial for, or involved in an appeal for an offence under the Citizenship Act, or an indictable offence in Canada,
4. are charged with, on trial for, or involved in an appeal for an offence committed outside Canada that is determined to be equivalent to an indictable offence in Canada
5. are under a removal order (Canadian officials have asked you to leave Canada)
6. are being investigated for, are charged with, on trial for, involved in an appeal for or have been convicted of a war crime or a crime against humanity
7. have had a citizenship application refused for misrepresentation in the past five years
8. have had your Canadian citizenship revoked (taken away) because of fraud in the past ten years
9. have had your Canadian citizenship revoked (taken away) because you have been convicted of terrorism, high treason, treason, or spying offences, depending on the sentence received; or because you have served as a member of an armed force of a country or organized armed group and that country or group engaged in armed conflict with Canada
10. have been convicted of an indictable offence in Canada or an offence under the Citizenship Act in the four years before you apply
11. have been convicted outside Canada of an offence that is determined to be equivalent to an indictable offence in Canada in the four years before you apply, even if you were pardoned or otherwise granted amnesty for the offence,
12. have been convicted of terrorism, high treason, treason, or spying offences while you were a permanent resident,
13. served as a member of an armed force of a country or organized armed group and that country or group engaged in armed conflict with Canada, while you were a permanent resident, or
14. never met or no longer meet the requirements for a grant or resumption of citizenship.

If you applied for a grant or resumption before June 11, 2015, most of these prohibitions would apply to you. However, if you have been convicted in Canada of an indictable offence or an offence under the Citizenship Act you would be prohibited in the three years before you apply, rather than four as listed above.

People who have had their citizenship revoked for any reason can never apply for resumption of citizenship.

If any of the above situations apply to you, you should wait until the situation no longer applies before you make an application for citizenship.

So let me explain.

1. means that you can not apply if you are currently in prison, paroled or on probation. It does not mean you can not apply if you were ever in prison or on probation.

3. means you are currently charged with, on trial or under appeal for committing an indictable offense. It does not mean that you can not apply if you were ever charged with, on trial or under appeal for committing an indictable offense.

10. means you can not apply for 4 years after having been convicted of an indictable offense in Canada. It does not mean that you can not apply if you were charged and cleared within the past 4 years, just if you were convicted and even if you were convicted, it does not mean that you can never apply, it just means you have to wait for at least 4 years since you were convicted.

So why are you saying that having been charged prevents you from applying for citizenship if you were cleared? It prevents you from applying while the charges are pending, yes but if you are cleared, you can apply.

And why are you saying that if you were convicted, you can never apply? Clearly you can apply if more than 4 years have past since your conviction and you are no longer in prison or on probation.

And when the thread started, it wasn't about being cleared, it was about a husband that (by mistake) steals $5000. Should immigration give him a pat on the back for that? Or would it be ok for immigration to say now, we would like to see that it was a one time mistake so let us wait for 4 years before we let you apply to see if you re-offend? Because that is essentially what they are doing.

 

[jakifamily]

Leon, have you actually seen the prohibition form (Green)? I wish i had taken a snapshot of it when I took my oath. Clearly I understand what you say, however that is not how it is worded on the prohibition form you are asked to sign.

Even though the OP started on a different matter, it still boils down to the same thing. The prohibition form ( which is clearly ill written ) makes no difference on past events whether they be cleared or not. It draws your attention to having EVER been arrested or charged in the last 4 years . That you may not take the oath.

Can someone say no, if they had been charged and then charges were withdrawn? You still have to mention the charge of course you do.
Can someone say no to an arrest, even if the arrest was unlawful and then then dropped? You still have to mention the arrest.

Even if someone had fulfilled a probation order and residence days are then given back ( especially with applications pre June 2015) that are still under process, there is now a new hurdle that an applicant has to contend with that wasn't there or part of the application that they signed and there is nothing they can do about it. At least that's how it reads on the Green prohibition form.

 

[Leon]

I have not seen this green form but if you look at the citizenship application the way it looks today, it looks a little different than the list on the website. These are all Yes or No questions.

8. PROHIBITIONS UNDER THE CITIZENSHIP ACT

A Are you now or have you ever been in the six (6) years immediately before the date of your application, or
since you became a permanent resident, whichever is most recent:

* on probation in Canada?
* on parole in Canada?
* an inmate of a pententiary, jail, reformatory, or prison in Canada?

B Are you now serving a sentence outside Canada for an offence?

C Are you now charged with, on trial for, or subject to or a party to an appeal relating to an offence under the
Citizenship Act or an indictable offence in Canada?

D Are you now charged with, on trial for, or subject to or a party to an appeal relating to an offence committed
outside Canada?

E Are you now, or have you ever been, under a removal order (have you been asked by Canadian officials to
leave Canada)?

F Are you now under investigation for, charged with, on trial for, subject or a party to an appeal relating to or
have you ever been convicted of a war crime or a crime against humanity?

G In the past five (5) years, were you prohibited from being granted citizenship or taking the Oath of Citizenship
because of misrepresentation or withholding material circumstances?

H In the past four (4) years, have you been convicted in Canada of an indictable offence under any Act of
Parliament or an offence under the Citizenship Act?

I In the past four (4) years, have you been convicted outside Canada of an offence, regardless of whether you
were pardoned or otherwise granted amnesty for the offence?

J While a permanent resident, have you:

* been convicted in Canada of terrorism, high treason, treason or spying offences?
* been convicted outside Canada of terrorism?
* served as a member of an armed force of a country or organized armed group and that country or group
engaged in armed conflict with Canada?

K In the past four (4) years, were you present in any country, other than Canada, for at least six (6) months
(cumulative)?

If you have checked "YES", provide police certificates for each country.


I have read and understand the prohibitions under the Citizenship Act.

If you have checked "YES" to any of the question listed above, provide details below. If applicable, attach court documents to avoid unnecessary delays.

This list of prohibitions is however not a strict list of things that would prevent you from getting citizenship. For example, it includes a 6 month absence from Canada. Also allows you to explain and include documents below to avoid delays. If these things were a strict prohibition, it would not do that.

In any case, if this green form is using stricter conditions than on the website or on the form, it would be good grounds for an appeal which would likely be won.