Refugee status cessation and PRs applying for citizenship

[Hanging_In_There]

Hello everyone,

I’ve just submitted my citizenship applications for myself and my kids, despite the potential risks. I firmly believe that I must face any challenges head on, as waiting a few more years would only prolong the inevitable. Delaying now could mean facing the same proceedings and delays later on.

Interestingly, my brother recently received a letter at my old address in my home country. The letter stated that, based on intelligence reports, my citizenship there has been "doubtfully revoked," and I was instructed to appear at an office in the capital city. When I checked their online portal using my passport and citizenship numbers, it showed my status as “blocked.”

To be honest, I would never consider returning to that country under any circumstances. I’ve also consulted a lawyer here in Canada, who assured me that I have strong grounds, substantial evidence, and solid reasons to proceed. Ultimately, the decision was mine to make, and I’ve chosen to be proactive and take this step.

I feel confident and happy that I’ve finally applied. Whatever happens next, I’m prepared to face it. Fingers crossed...let’s see what the future holds. Wish me Luck and send good vibes.

I am thrilled and deeply proud to share that I have officially become a Canadian citizen...

This past week, I stood before my fellow Canadians, took the Oath of Citizenship, and felt a profound sense of belonging and joy fill my heart. Everything went smoothly, but the emotions I experienced were unforgettable, pride, gratitude, and a renewed sense of hope.

Thank you to everyone who supported me on this journey. Today, as a citizen, I am more committed than ever to embracing our country's values of kindness, inclusion, and resilience. From the bottom of my heart, thank you, Canada. I am honoured and so happy to be home.

 

[abeabeaeee]

I am thrilled and deeply proud to share that I have officially become a Canadian citizen...

This past week, I stood before my fellow Canadians, took the Oath of Citizenship, and felt a profound sense of belonging and joy fill my heart. Everything went smoothly, but the emotions I experienced were unforgettable, pride, gratitude, and a renewed sense of hope.

Thank you to everyone who supported me on this journey. Today, as a citizen, I am more committed than ever to embracing our country's values of kindness, inclusion, and resilience. From the bottom of my heart, thank you, Canada. I am honoured and so happy to be home.

Congratulations from the bottom of my heart. Can I ask you a question? How long did you stay in your home country?

 

[canuck78]

Not necessarily a new case but the outcome of a JR of a cessation case for those who read French.

https://www.canlii.org/fr/ca/cfpi/d...528&searchUrlHash=AAAAAQAJQ2Vzc2F0aW9uAAAAAAE

 

[dpenabill]

Not necessarily a new case but the outcome of a JR of a cessation case for those who read French.

https://www.canlii.org/fr/ca/cfpi/d...528&searchUrlHash=AAAAAQAJQ2Vzc2F0aW9uAAAAAAE

I cannot read French.

Even though the decision in Rosas Castro v. Canada, 2025 FC 1366, https://canlii.ca/t/kds88 was just last week, so a new decision, it does not offer new light on cessation cases.

It does, however, illustrate how long the process can take: cessation proceedings started in 2017, the cessation decision itself did not happen until 2023, and the final adjudication of that decision was just last week . . . so now the procedures for actual deportation may begin for this man who has been a permanent resident of Canada for a quarter century (since 2000), a man who has traveled to his home country twice in the last decade.

And it appears to illustrate that the government is aggressively pursuing even those cases largely based on travel back when there were no grounds for terminating PR status for such travel -- most of his trips to the home country, Peru, were before the change in law in 2012.

Meanwhile I have personally grown lax watching for new cessation cases. If anyone sees that there has been any new developments in those cases challenging the termination of PR status for cessation, on Charter grounds, please alert the forum including notice in this thread.

 

[canuck78]

I cannot read French.

Even though the decision in Rosas Castro v. Canada, 2025 FC 1366, https://canlii.ca/t/kds88 was just last week, so a new decision, it does not offer new light on cessation cases.

It does, however, illustrate how long the process can take: cessation proceedings started in 2017, the cessation decision itself did not happen until 2023, and the final adjudication of that decision was just last week . . . so now the procedures for actual deportation may begin for this man who has been a permanent resident of Canada for a quarter century (since 2000), a man who has traveled to his home country twice in the last decade.

And it appears to illustrate that the government is aggressively pursuing even those cases largely based on travel back when there were no grounds for terminating PR status for such travel -- most of his trips to the home country, Peru, were before the change in law in 2012.

Meanwhile I have personally grown lax watching for new cessation cases. If anyone sees that there has been any new developments in those cases challenging the termination of PR status for cessation, on Charter grounds, please alert the forum including notice in this thread.

Agree it is slow processing but a large part was due to applicant who asked for extensions to secure counsel, for mental health reasons but with no strong evidence of ongoing treatment/severe disability, etc. Also obtained new Peruvian passport after cessation had been started. Reason for travel back to Peru for 2 weeks- 4 month visits were to treat his diabetes. Initial visit back to Peru using Peruvian passport was right after receiving protected person status. Waiting 20 years to start a cessation case is pretty extreme given there is no shortage of immigration fraud that goes unpunished and seems to get overlooked. Also shows how poorly system is run since I can’t imagine travel for Peruvian citizens was visa exempt since the 90s.

The JR system extremely overwhelmed and will continue to face longer backlogs.

 

[abff08f4813c]

I cannot read French.

I'm trying to learn (rather desperately), but for now I have to rely on machine translation.

it does not offer new light on cessation cases.

It does, however, illustrate how long the process can take

Agreed on both counts.

a man who has traveled to his home country twice in the last decade.

The machine translation gives me this, so while twice in the last decade may be accurate, overall it's been quite a bit more than that. I'd add that he likely stopped traveling because of the proceedings which commenced in 2017.
[[7] A few months after obtaining his permanent residence, Mr. Castro used his Peruvian passport to travel to Peru, a passport he obtained by presenting himself at the Peruvian consulate in Canada. Mr. Castro travelled to Peru seven times on this passport, and renewed it three times, in 2003, 2006 and 2009.

[[8] In September 2013, Mr. Castro obtained a new Peruvian passport expiring in 2018, and used it to travel twice to Peru.

so now the procedures for actual deportation may begin for this man who has been a permanent resident of Canada for a quarter century (since 2000)

Hmm, but this is at the Federal Court (i.e. a court of first instance). If he attempts to appeal to the Federal Court of Appeals, would that delay the procedures, or might he be deported while that appeal is ongoing?

And it appears to illustrate that the government is aggressively pursuing even those cases largely based on travel back when there were no grounds for terminating PR status for such travel -- most of his trips to the home country, Peru, were before the change in law in 2012.

This has always troubled me. Basically it looks very much like an ex post facto application of the law, criminalizing something that wasn't a crime when it happened.

(I've previously wrote that I also disagree with the premise here, namely that having permanent residence in Canada may be enough to protect a former political asylumee who makes a visit to their home country.

It certainly has happened before. While not obligated to, and while it certainly doesn't happen every time, there have been instances where Canada has indeed provided consular assistance to a permanent resident of Canada, as per https://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Committee/421/FAAE/Reports/RP10186936/faaerp21/faaerp21-e.pdf (page 29) and https://www.ourcommons.ca/DocumentViewer/en/42-1/FAAE/meeting-104/evidence


"
Ms. Carol McCalla:
We didn't look particularly at that case. We did see that they have discretion on whether or not they will provide consular assistance to non-Canadians. I believe we did come across one or two cases in our sample in which they did that.
"

In other words, PR holders can obtain the protection of Canada, and this can be effective.)

Meanwhile I have personally grown lax watching for new cessation cases. If anyone sees that there has been any new developments in those cases challenging the termination of PR status for cessation, on Charter grounds, please alert the forum including notice in this thread.

I'm also quite lax here, but definitely will try to send stuff your way if I see anything relevant (i.e. something new has happened with respect to the law).

I strongly suspect that we'll need to see more cases at least hitting the FCA before we start seeing any changes, though..

The JR system extremely overwhelmed and will continue to face longer backlogs.

Can't disagree with this.

Agree it is slow processing but a large part was due to applicant who asked for extensions to secure counsel,

Eh, from the timeline given in the case itself, it seems like the delay for counsel was actually not that much compared to the overall timeline,
[[12] On April 10, 2022, at a management conference before the RPD, the court granted Mr. Castro time to find counsel and ensured that Mr. Castro had a copy of the Minister's application. Mr. Castro then again asked for more time to find counsel, which the RPD granted him.

[[13] On March 22, 2023, Mr. Castro disclosed the name of his counsel to the RPD.

Agree it is slow processing but a large part was due to applicant who asked for extensions ... for mental health reasons but with no strong evidence of ongoing treatment/severe disability

I don't think this was the case. Once the hearing date of Sept 12, 2023 was set, the applicant asked for a delay for these reasons, but it was repeatedly denied and - if the translation is accurate - the hearing was in fact held on that day. So this didn't seem to delay anything.

Agree it is slow processing but a large part was due to applicant... etc.

It's not clear from that web page what happened between May 8, 2017 and April 10, 2022. I'd guess a big reason behind the 2020-2022 delay could be from COVID, but it seems nothing really happened from 2017 to 2019.

It seems to be that the largest part of the delay isn't from the applicant. COVID was bigger, and the gov't itself seemed to have an equally long delay as COVID in the pre-COVID times.

Also obtained new Peruvian passport after cessation had been started. Reason for travel back to Peru for 2 weeks- 4 month visits were to treat his diabetes. Initial visit back to Peru using Peruvian passport was right after receiving protected person status.

I'm of two minds about this. On the one hand, under current rules, this is a pretty clear violation. There's no need to visit Peru for 4 months to treat diabetes, and getting a passport right away after getting protected person status seems.. extreme.

On the other hand, this seems to have mostly happened before the law changed in 2012, so it wasn't illegal when the applicant did it. And, if the applicant thought he was under Canadian protection while in Peru, then staying 4 months to get comfortably treated (when it's a free choice without consequences) in a language one is familiar with, it makes a bit more sense in that light. It's not a necessity, it's a luxury.

Also shows how poorly system is run since I can’t imagine travel for Peruvian citizens was visa exempt since the 90s.

According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_requirements_for_Peruvian_citizens they still need a visa today. Don't understand how this relates to a poorly run system, though.

Waiting 20 years to start a cessation case is pretty extreme given there is no shortage of immigration fraud that goes unpunished and seems to get overlooked.

Well, how do we know that it is being overlooked and will forever go unpunished? Perhaps we'll see the punishments come in another 20 years or so... not quite the same but I know of a case that took even longer, 32 years! https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toro...p-revoked-after-32-years-amid-error-1.7196530

 

[canuck78]

I'm trying to learn (rather desperately), but for now I have to rely on machine translation.


Agreed on both counts.


The machine translation gives me this, so while twice in the last decade may be accurate, overall it's been quite a bit more than that. I'd add that he likely stopped traveling because of the proceedings which commenced in 2017.
[[7] A few months after obtaining his permanent residence, Mr. Castro used his Peruvian passport to travel to Peru, a passport he obtained by presenting himself at the Peruvian consulate in Canada. Mr. Castro travelled to Peru seven times on this passport, and renewed it three times, in 2003, 2006 and 2009.

[[8] In September 2013, Mr. Castro obtained a new Peruvian passport expiring in 2018, and used it to travel twice to Peru.


Hmm, but this is at the Federal Court (i.e. a court of first instance). If he attempts to appeal to the Federal Court of Appeals, would that delay the procedures, or might he be deported while that appeal is ongoing?


This has always troubled me. Basically it looks very much like an ex post facto application of the law, criminalizing something that wasn't a crime when it happened.

(I've previously wrote that I also disagree with the premise here, namely that having permanent residence in Canada may be enough to protect a former political asylumee who makes a visit to their home country.

It certainly has happened before. While not obligated to, and while it certainly doesn't happen every time, there have been instances where Canada has indeed provided consular assistance to a permanent resident of Canada, as per https://www.ourcommons.ca/Content/Committee/421/FAAE/Reports/RP10186936/faaerp21/faaerp21-e.pdf (page 29) and https://www.ourcommons.ca/DocumentViewer/en/42-1/FAAE/meeting-104/evidence


"
Ms. Carol McCalla:
We didn't look particularly at that case. We did see that they have discretion on whether or not they will provide consular assistance to non-Canadians. I believe we did come across one or two cases in our sample in which they did that.
"

In other words, PR holders can obtain the protection of Canada, and this can be effective.)


I'm also quite lax here, but definitely will try to send stuff your way if I see anything relevant (i.e. something new has happened with respect to the law).

I strongly suspect that we'll need to see more cases at least hitting the FCA before we start seeing any changes, though..


Can't disagree with this.


Eh, from the timeline given in the case itself, it seems like the delay for counsel was actually not that much compared to the overall timeline,
[[12] On April 10, 2022, at a management conference before the RPD, the court granted Mr. Castro time to find counsel and ensured that Mr. Castro had a copy of the Minister's application. Mr. Castro then again asked for more time to find counsel, which the RPD granted him.

[[13] On March 22, 2023, Mr. Castro disclosed the name of his counsel to the RPD.


I don't think this was the case. Once the hearing date of Sept 12, 2023 was set, the applicant asked for a delay for these reasons, but it was repeatedly denied and - if the translation is accurate - the hearing was in fact held on that day. So this didn't seem to delay anything.



It's not clear from that web page what happened between May 8, 2017 and April 10, 2022. I'd guess a big reason behind the 2020-2022 delay could be from COVID, but it seems nothing really happened from 2017 to 2019.

It seems to be that the largest part of the delay isn't from the applicant. COVID was bigger, and the gov't itself seemed to have an equally long delay as COVID in the pre-COVID times.

Yea Covid played a large part in delays.

I'm of two minds about this. On the one hand, under current rules, this is a pretty clear violation. There's no need to visit Peru for 4 months to treat diabetes, and getting a passport right away after getting protected person status seems.. extreme.

On the other hand, this seems to have mostly happened before the law changed in 2012, so it wasn't illegal when the applicant did it. And, if the applicant thought he was under Canadian protection while in Peru, then staying 4 months to get comfortably treated (when it's a free choice without consequences) in a language one is familiar with, it makes a bit more sense in that light. It's not a necessity, it's a luxury.

If you are claiming persecution renewing your home country passport and returning home country months after receiving asylum does in my mind raise concerns about asylum claim credibility.

According to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visa_requirements_for_Peruvian_citizens they still need a visa today. Don't understand how this relates to a poorly run system, though.

If a PR they should have never been granted a TRV. IRCC clearly had not figured out that he had status in Canada while he applied for TRVs with his Peruvian passport and perhaps an ETA (which believe is what is now required).


Well, how do we know that it is being overlooked and will forever go unpunished? Perhaps we'll see the punishments come in another 20 years or so... not quite the same but I know of a case that took even longer, 32 years! https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toro...p-revoked-after-32-years-amid-error-1.7196530

In general the longer someone remains in Canada, especially if they now have a family in Canada who can retain their status, the harder it will be to remove them. If they have an easy pathway to return at a certain point the government needs to question whether resources being allocated to the case can be justified.