No updates in my Citizenship application

[rigo77]

Hi, it is almost 16 months since I applied for my citizenship.
Application received in June 18, 2024
Citizenship test completed in Sept 11, 2024, Background verification completed and Physical presence completed in Sept 23.. since then no updates..
I have been calling IRCC every 2/3 weeks for updates and nothing.. they say everything is ok and normal and I have to keep waiting.. but it’s 14 months since the last update and almost 18 in total

Any idea or tips? Is this normal? What should I do? I already spoke with the MP but he didn’t help much, at this point I’m very frustrated

 

[m34]

Have you asked for gcms notes? Maybe it’ll give you a hint on what’s the issue.
What documents you used for language skills?

 

[armoured]

Order your gcms notes, from cbsa and from ircc. It's not likely it will tell you much although sections redacted under the security exemptions may indicate that security clearances are the hold-up. If so, there's not a lot that can be done in most cases except wait. It's more common for some nationalities (amongst other reasons).

 

[m34]

Order your gcms notes, from cbsa and from ircc. It's not likely it will tell you much although sections redacted under the security exemptions may indicate that security clearances are the hold-up. If so, there's not a lot that can be done in most cases except wait. It's more common for some nationalities (amongst other reasons).

Would security clearance be the case in your opinion as his/her background seems to be completed??

 

[Seym]

I agree with the comments above regarding asking for GCMS notes.
Usually, it's either the security checks or the physical presence that seem to be the blocker, but both have been marked as complete, so it's an unusual situation.
Can OP think of any issue with, say, their language proof ? For the overwhelming majority of applicants, language is cleared at the same time as physical presence, and unless OP forgot to specify that is was cleared too, there could be something fishy with it that would explain why it wasn't cleared at the same time. Is it a language proof from some "unknown school" from a non-english speaking country that doesn't make it obvious that OP speaks the language, or some private institute in Canada that provides a certificate after a few months or something like this that may raise questions at IRCC level ?

 

[armoured]

Would security clearance be the case in your opinion as his/her background seems to be completed??

As far as I can tell, yes - I don't understand the exact differences between background and prohibitions, but it seems not at all rare that prohibitions get held up even after background is marked cleared. (Note that sometimes at least all three of the secondary, language-physical presence-prohibitions, are still pending, but reality underlying probably is that IRCC officer has looked at the easier L-P and sees no issues but hasn't bothered formally clearing while awaiting 'third party' input for prohibitions).

My rough guess on the split is basically 'background' is general + simple in-Canada criminality clearances (possibly supplemented with info from partners like USA where database checks come quickly). Leaving mostly 'prohibitions' - threats to security of Canada,* pattern of criminal behaviour*, offences/charges outside Canada* (yes, this is criminality, but not in-Canada or easily found via databases), crimes against humanity/war crimes*, terrorism*, other specific prohibitions (some of which need to be confirmed). At some point there's also going to be a risk assessment - eg is there's zero database hits and background is very low risk, that's a quicker clearance.

* I flagged some here that I think are the most likely to be things that can cause hold-ups - because they can/could involve, frequently, information (database mentions, false name hits, public-source info like news mentions, info from other partner agencies - or sometimes non-partner agencies - in other countries) that is incomplete or can't easily be verified.

Served in a foreign military that was in conflict with another country? Someone has to look at that and make a judgment based on incomplete info. Worked for a foreign government (or sometimes agencies or companies in those countries) that's considered an intelligence threat? Allegations of criminal backgrounds/connections (from anywhere, really)? All things that may provide unattested info or intelligence that someone has to look into and make some kind of decision on.

Important to underline here: the vast majority of the time spent 'looking into' these things is likely waiting, for someone to get some additional info, and later to make some judgment that they do have enough info to make a decision.

And yes, it seems intuitive to most that the PR clearances should be enough for most applicants, and for most applicants that's probably true. My belief/understanding is that the language in the citizenship act is quite different, outlining an absolute 'prohibition' for certain things, as opposed to making a more explicit 'risk evaluation' for PR approval - the difference being requiring an affirmative statement that 'no these things do not apply' (not prohibited) compared to a 'risk of issues is acceptable' (and that may be formulated differently, i.e. a no-objection might be enough).

I have also heard and read that all agencies know that it is almost impossible to revoke citizenship after the fact (only a handful of cases), serious political repercussions (as often seen) for any cases where mistakes are made, and a very, very challenging problem of 'intelligence to evidence' and how the law requires they deal with such cases. (Basically, if they truly believe someone is a 'threat to Canada', do they have enough legally acceptable evidence - when most of that evidence will not be from within Canada)

I don't know all of this for certain of course. It's a somewhat-informed series of guesses. And of course some of this is just IRCC procedures that may change/have changed over time.

 

[dpenabill]

.

Hi, it is almost 16 months since I applied for my citizenship.
Application received in June 18, 2024
Citizenship test completed in Sept 11, 2024, Background verification completed and Physical presence completed in Sept 23.. since then no updates..
I have been calling IRCC every 2/3 weeks for updates and nothing.. they say everything is ok and normal and I have to keep waiting.. but it’s 14 months since the last update and almost 18 in total

Any idea or tips? Is this normal? What should I do? I already spoke with the MP but he didn’t help much, at this point I’m very frustrated

What should I do?

No rocket science or expertise in Canadian immigration necessary:

-- follow IRCC instructions and guidance (see website)​

-- -- note, it appears you have not been doing this, given your repeated calls requesting updates despite IRCC guidance explicitly stating that IRCC "agents do not have more information about your application status or processing time than what's available online," instructing applicants in your situation (a complex application requiring non-routine checks) to sign into their citizenship tracker account (which should have as much information about the status of your application as any call centre agent would)​

​

AND​

​

-- wait for IRCC to complete processing your application or until you get further information or requests from IRCC​

​

OR​

​

-- see a lawyer​

-- -- at the least paying for a consultation, paying the lawyer to review your case in particular, in detail; that is, a review based on copies of your application and communications with IRCC, including copies of all previous applications and any additional information you have that is likely to be relevant, including international travel history and including especially any information inconsistent with information in your application​

Mostly Wait . . .

For most in your situation, the main thing to do is wait (ceasing, in the meantime, to make those repeated, futile calls to the call centre which mostly only make it more difficult to get through for those with questions the call centre can answer . . . please).

How long to wait before apprehending there could be a serious issue indicating it might be time to obtain the assistance of a lawyer is difficult to say. Complex case processing times vary widely, both generally, and very much so in regards to the many variables affecting the process for any particular individual. A lot depends on the latter, ranging from differences in overall history (whether the applicant is a refugee, for example; other variations in the applicant's path to becoming a Canadian) to post-application factors (whether the applicant continues to reside in Canada for example, just one example among many), including things like where in the world the applicant has been along the way.

Under current and recent processing times (as reported by IRCC and for complex cases as discerned from anecdotal reporting) . . .

For many who after carefully and as objectively as possible (yeah this is not easy) reviewing their case and personal history, considering known reasons why applications can get tangled in not just complex but highly complex processing (see below), who do not see (again, being as objective as possible) what could be the problem, if it has been much over two years it is probably time to at least consider seeing a lawyer.

For those who, in reviewing their case, see a potential issue but NOT something that should constitute a serious problem (inadmissibility, reason for security or criminality concerns, misrepresentation, for refugees potential cessation), waiting closer to three years, or a little more, would make sense. (Again, this is under currently known processing timelines.)

It should go without saying, if the applicant identifies something in their case that could constitute a serious problem, they should get help from a lawyer sooner not later.


Re GCMS records

Even though GCMS notes might offer some information which could illuminate more about WHY your application is complex, NOT on a "normal" processing track, and despite the extent to which that is among forum favourites, the client's version of GCMS records are not likely to inform you much, if any, about why your application is complex or what additional (non-routine) checks are being done.

You already know most of the potential reasons why your case is complex and it is IRCC that needs "to check more things on your application for security reasons" (according to IRCC regarding any application made in June 2024 which is still in process), since YOU know your case better than anyone else in the whole world. There are exceptions, of course, such as unwarranted inferences or suspicions, unfounded conclusions, but that happens way, way less often than many in this forum pretend.

Since minimal effort and virtually no expense is necessary to obtain GCMS records, there is no harm getting them. Just don't expect much.

Beyond That, If You Are Seeking a Better Understanding of Your Case:

Is this normal?

For an application made in June 2024 the IRCC processing time information states:

We might not be able to give you an estimate because:

• your application is complex
• we need to check more things on your application for security reasons

and further states:

We consider your application complex or non-routine if some parts of your application need extra review or processing on our part.

It may take us longer than the normal processing time to review a non-routine application.

Given the timeline so far, your application is clearly, at the least, complex.

If you want to better understand what that is about, and in particular if you want to assess the risk your application is not just complex (for which just waiting is mostly all you need to do) but highly complex (such as a serious security concern), in which case best to see a lawyer, as I noted you already know most of what there is to know. The challenge, then, is to know what details in YOUR case could be of concern in regards to potential issues, in regards to what could preclude eligibility either in terms of meeting the requirements or in terms of a prohibition . . . and other than a case in which physical presence is in issue, this is mostly about what might constitute a prohibition.

The latter is more complicated than potential security concerns, ranging from any reason that could make a PR inadmissible to misrepresentation in either the citizenship application or any previous immigration related transactions (including Port-of-Entry examinations).