Woman Fights to Get Citizenship Back.

[links18]

https://www.thestar.com/news/immigration/2016/08/28/bc-woman-fights-to-get-citizenship-back-after-obscure-rule-leaves-her-stateless.html

Good Grief, they still haven't fixed this?

 

[ambient2]

https://www.thestar.com/news/immigration/2016/08/28/bc-woman-fights-to-get-citizenship-back-after-obscure-rule-leaves-her-stateless.html

Good Grief, they still haven't fixed this?

What a shame, I sometimes question how this country can be part of G8 and considered to be progressive? Conservative ruin stuff, Liberals then add more. Entire system is run by amateurs.

 

[screech339]

Not sure what's the issue is. She is NOT stateless. She has Mexican citizenship. The Star loves to make up stuff that isn't true. It is rather unfortunate that she isn't aware of Canadian citizenship laws. But that doesn't make her special or any different from any other citizens who lost citizenship due to not retaining citizenship by 28. That retention law has been in place for years until Harper updated the citizenship laws that did away with citizenship retention.

 

[ambient2]

Not sure what's the issue is. She is NOT stateless. She has Mexican citizenship. The Star loves to make up stuff that isn't true. It is rather unfortunate that she isn't aware of Canadian citizenship laws. But that doesn't make her special or any different from any other citizens who lost citizenship due to not retaining citizenship by 28. That retention law has been in place for years until Harper updated the citizenship laws that did away with citizenship retention.

Article clearly stated that she is stateless. The fact that she might be eligible for Mexican citizenship still doesn't make her a citizen of Mexico. And in this case Citizenship by decent laws shouldn't apply for people who are already citizens (and turning 28). That law should have applied to her future kids born outside of Canada.
Also without notifying person and getting his/her consent, government shouldn't be able to take away citizenship, even with the new law of stripping citizenship based on terrorist charges, cancelling citizenship should go through the court.
Well, that my personal opinion. We didn't immigrate to this country so we could be blackmailed by CIC any time you don't 'satisfy' them.

 

[screech339]

Article clearly stated that she is stateless. The fact that she might be eligible for Mexican citizenship still doesn't make her a citizen of Mexico. And in this case Citizenship by decent laws shouldn't apply for people who are already citizens (and turning 28). That law should have applied to her future kids born outside of Canada.
Also without notifying person and getting his/her consent, government shouldn't be able to take away citizenship, even with the new law of stripping citizenship based on terrorist charges, cancelling citizenship should go through the court.
Well, that my personal opinion. We didn't immigrate to this country so we could be blackmailed by CIC any time you don't 'satisfy' them.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_nationality_law

Nationality by birth

The Mexican Constitution states that Mexicans Citizens by birth are:[1]

persons born in Mexican territory regardless of parents' nationality or immigration status in Mexico

This Mexico nationality law says she is citizen of Mexico. She has Mexican citizenship. Not "might be eligible for mexican citizenship". So she is NOT STATELESS.

The Star also mis-stated that Indian Deepan Budlakoti was stateless. He is not stateless. He has Indian citizenship on account that his parents were Indian Diplomats at time of his birth, thus has Indian citizenship. If India doesn't want to give Indian citizenship on account of that, that's an issue between Deepan and India. Not Canada's.

 

[links18]

Stateless or not she is in a pretty tight spot due to arcane and impractical laws.....

 

[screech339]

Stateless or not she is in a pretty tight spot due to arcane and impractical laws.....

Yes, she's been living in Canada illegally for 8 years, due to not retaining her citizenship by 28. She brought this on to herself.

Not sure how you call the retention rules arcane and impractical. The retention rules had been in place for 32 years and no one said a peep about it until Harper did away with this "arcane and impractical" law in 2009.

 

[links18]

Stateless or not she is in a pretty tight spot due to arcane and impractical laws that should have already been changed

 

[screech339]

Stateless or not she is in a pretty tight spot due to arcane and impractical laws that should have already been changed

It was finally changed in 2009. Otherwise, if it was changed 2007, this woman wouldn't be complaining about it, but instead it would be some other "poor unfortunate" person, who didn't follow up on the retention rules. Where does it end? How far back do we need to retroactive the removal of retention rule? Why should Canada give back citizenship to those who was ignorance of citizenship laws or didn't bother to retain citizenship themselves, despite knowing the rules themselves. No matter when the retention rules got removed, there will always be someone else who lost citizenship due to retention rules.

 

[links18]

It was finally changed in 2009. Otherwise, if it was changed 2007, this woman wouldn't be complaining about it, but instead it would be some other "poor unfortunate" person, who didn't follow up on the retention rules. Where does it end? How far back do we need to retroactive the removal of retention rule? Why should Canada give back citizenship to those who was ignorance of citizenship laws or didn't bother to retain citizenship themselves, despite knowing the rules themselves. No matter when the retention rules get removed, there is always someone else who lost citizenship due to retention rules.

Maybe it should all people living in Canada as Canadians, who were once Canadians, who had no practical reason to suspect they weren't actually Canadians?

 

[screech339]

Maybe it should all people living in Canada as Canadians, who were once Canadians, who had no practical reason to suspect they weren't actually Canadians?

The retention rules was a mild form of limiting citizenship from passing from one generation to the next. It doesn't stop it completely as those who lived overseas can easily re-enter Canada to retain citizenship and once retained, they leave permanently. They can repeat the whole thing over and over for "generations".

The new 2009 law, completely removes this capability, limiting citizenship to 1st and 2nd generations only.

 

[links18]

The retention rules was a mild form of limiting citizenship from passing from one generation to the next. It doesn't stop it completely as those who lived overseas can easily re-enter Canada to retain citizenship and once retained, they leave permanently. They can repeat the whole thing over and over for "generations".

The new 2009 law, completely removes this capability, limiting citizenship to 1st and 2nd generations only.

I know, but the fact of the matter is there are still "lost Canadians" out there whose situation the law hasn't effectively addressed even though prior governments have admitted there is a problem. Many of these people have lived in Canada for years since they were children and know no other place as home. It particularly affects people from a Mennonite background who may have been born overseas, but came to Canada as infants or toddlers.They are Canadian in every sense of the term except they find out, often by accident, they aren't legally Canadian anymore.

 

[screech339]

I know, but the fact of the matter is there are still "lost Canadians" out there whose situation the law hasn't effectively addressed even though prior governments have admitted there is a problem. Many of these people have lived in Canada for years since they were children and know no other place as home. It particularly affects people from a Mennonite background who may have been born overseas, but came to Canada as infants or toddlers.They are Canadian in every sense of the term except they find out, often by accident, they aren't legally Canadian anymore.

I agree. There are "lost canadians" out there. Most examples like, war brides, children born to unwed mothers, etc etc, due to old citizenship laws. Basically they either lost it or wasn't recognized that was out of their control. The updated law does help solve most of these issues, not all, but most by recognizing them as Canadians. However I would not call this woman in article one of the "Lost Canadians". She had it and she lost it due to not retaining her citizenship.

 

[nope]

Yes, she's been living in Canada illegally for 8 years, due to not retaining her citizenship by 28. She brought this on to herself.

Not sure how you call the retention rules arcane and impractical. The retention rules had been in place for 32 years and no one said a peep about it until Harper did away with this "arcane and impractical" law in 2009.

How exactly did she bring this on herself? What the heck is wrong with you?

 

[screech339]

How exactly did she bring this on herself? What the heck is wrong with you?

She brought this on herself by not retention her citizenship by 28. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. It is not like she lost it out of her control. She had complete control over her citizenship.