Citizenship/Residency for minors

[Celeste]

Thank you Taffy - I know that they can enter Canada without a visa but my question was specifically about re-activating their permanent residency status once they are there. Anyone got any ideas?

 

[zardoz]

Thank you Taffy - I know that they can enter Canada without a visa but my question was specifically about re-activating their permanent residency status once they are there. Anyone got any ideas?

They don't need to reactivate it. Unless it's been revoked (and you would know this) they ARE Permanent Residents still. That's not to say that proceedings might not start that would cause it to be revoked if they don't meet the residency obligations.

 

[Avadava]

The only countries Canada doesn't have an agreement in force with (regarding the Hague convention of international child abductions) are: Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Dominican Republic, Gabon, Guatemala, Guinea, Kazakhstan, Lesotho, Morocco, Nicaragua, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, San Marino, Seychelles, Singapore, Thailand and Ukraine.

http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/fr_hague


I also found this:

"The central authorities under the Hague Convention (discussed below) are yet another source of data on child abductions. Between 1993 and 1996, central authorities in Canada were involved in 145 cases seeking the return of 209 children from Canada (incoming cases) and 173 cases seeking the return of 232 children to Canada (outgoing cases)"

Source: http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?DocId=1031518&File=12&Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=36&Ses=1

"Twenty years ago, in response to an increase in the number of parentally abducted children taken across borders, Canada initiated negotiations with some 30 other countries to search for an international remedy. This initiative led to the drafting of the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction, by the Hague Conference on Private International Law. The Hague Convention, the only multilateral instrument providing assistance in the cross-border abduction of children, came into force on 1 December 1983."

The Hague Convention doesn't apply to children 16 years of age or older.


You should google for this: THE HAGUE CONVENTION ON THE CIVIL ASPECTS OF INTERNATIONAL CHILD ABDUCTION.

This article is very interesting as well: http://www.marilynstowe.co.uk/2012/03/23/an-update-on-child-abduction-and-the-hague-convention-by-guest-blogger-jennifer-hollyer/

 

[screech339]

The only countries Canada doesn't have an agreement in force with (regarding the Hague convention of international child abductions) are: Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Dominican Republic, Gabon, Guatemala, Guinea, Kazakhstan, Lesotho, Morocco, Nicaragua, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, San Marino, Seychelles, Singapore, Thailand and Ukraine.

http://www.bclaws.ca/civix/document/id/complete/statreg/fr_hague

What I don't understand about the list you posted according to the weblink is that every country listed except for Kazahistan are signaturies to the Hague convention on the civil aspects of international child abduction.

I thought once the country signed on, you abide by it to every other country in the convention. Japan has just recently joined it this year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hague_abduction_convention

Screech339

 

[canuck_in_uk]

I am in contact with my british lawyer but she has asked if I can find out these 2 specific points which is why I am asking on here

You need to be speaking with a lawyer who specializes in international custody cases and already knows the answers to those questions instead of sending you off to find out.

 

[Avadava]

I thought once the country signed on, you abide by it to every other country in the convention. Japan has just recently joined it this year.

That doesn't seem to be the norm actually. According to the wikipedia link you posted: "Noncompliance with the terms and spirit of the Hague Convention has been a particularly difficult problem in the practical implementation of the Convention. In 2009, the United States declared Brazil, Chile, Honduras, Greece and Mexico displayed "patterns of non-compliance" or "noncompliance".

As I understand it, there is a difference between countries being signatories and in force.

The list I posted earlier says: "Acceding countries with which Canada does not have an agreement in force:
Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Dominican Republic, Gabon, Guatemala, Guinea, Kazakhstan, Lesotho, Morocco, Nicaragua, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, San Marino, Seychelles, Singapore, Thailand and Ukraine."

See also: http://www.hcch.net/index_en.php?act=conventions.status&cid=24 (This list is more detailed than the wikipedia entry)

 

[rhcohen2014]

i suspect if your ex husband is applying for citizenship for his children (if that's at all even possible to do while they are living in the UK), as others have suggested, he will need you to sign a consent form, and i believe provide proof of the current custody agreement. he needs to do this even if he's traveling with them alone. If immigration sees he does not have full custody of his children, then i suspect he will run into trouble.

if you are that concerned about your husband keeping your children in canada without your consent, then my suggestion would be to revoke their passports so they are unable to travel with him until you figure everything out legally as he is now proposing changes to the terms of your agreement. This is what my mother did when she was going through a divorce with my UK born father many many years ago.

 

[screech339]

That doesn't seem to be the norm actually. According to the wikipedia link you posted: "Noncompliance with the terms and spirit of the Hague Convention has been a particularly difficult problem in the practical implementation of the Convention. In 2009, the United States declared Brazil, Chile, Honduras, Greece and Mexico displayed "patterns of non-compliance" or "noncompliance".

As I understand it, there is a difference between countries being signatories and in force.

The list I posted earlier says: "Acceding countries with which Canada does not have an agreement in force:
Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Dominican Republic, Gabon, Guatemala, Guinea, Kazakhstan, Lesotho, Morocco, Nicaragua, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, San Marino, Seychelles, Singapore, Thailand and Ukraine."

See also: http://www.hcch.net/index_en.php?act=conventions.status&cid=24 (This list is more detailed than the wikipedia entry)

While I agree that there is a difference between "in force" and being signatories, but what's the point of it the convention if it is not enforceable to everyone to signed the convention. If it doesn't have any teeth in enforcement, the paper is not worth the ink it is dried on.

Don't sign the paper if you don't want to follow the rules.

 

[Avadava]

While I agree that there is a difference between "in force" and being signatories, but what's the point of it the convention if it is not enforceable to everyone to signed the convention. If it doesn't have any teeth in enforcement, the paper is not worth the ink it is dried on.

Don't sign the paper if you don't want to follow the rules.

I agree, but we seem to be digressing. The bottom line, from what I've read is that Canada does have an in force agreement with UK regarding the Hague Convention on international child abduction. And it will be enforced as long as the child is less than 16 years of age. That was one of the questions the OP had.

What surprises me the most is that a lawyer asked her to find this information. I mean honestly, why do we even pay lawyers?

 

[zardoz]

The problem arises when shared custody (or lack of formal custody arrangements) is in place. When is abduction, not abduction? If the father has them with him, by consent, and the children do not object to remaining in Canada, will the courts rule in the OP's favour?

 

[rhcohen2014]

The problem arises when shared custody (or lack of formal custody arrangements) is in place. When is abduction, not abduction? If the father has them with him, by consent, and the children do not object to remaining in Canada, will the courts rule in the OP's favour?

it sounds like there is already a custody agreement, and the children live with the mother full time. so yes, the courts will rule in the OP's favor if there is proof to back this up and legal documentation. One parent simply can not just move children to a foreign country without the other parent's consent. that is called kidnapping. they can certainly try to travel and enter with the kids, but rest assured if a mother believes her children have been taken without her permission, she will do what's necessary to get them back!

 

[zardoz]

it sounds like there is already a custody agreement, and the children live with the mother full time. so yes, the courts will rule in the OP's favor if there is proof to back this up and legal documentation. One parent simply can not just move children to a foreign country without the other parent's consent. that is called kidnapping.

That's exactly why I specified ", by consent," in my post.

 

[rhcohen2014]

That's exactly why I specified ", by consent," in my post.

isn't it all relative? i mean if the mother gives consent for summer holiday, and the father neglects to return them for the new school year, that's in breach of the agreement and the consent. consent can be given long term and short term. i would suspect a citizenship application would require a change in custody and long term consent.

 

[zardoz]

isn't it all relative? i mean if the mother gives consent for summer holiday, and the father neglects to return them for the new school year, that's in breach of the agreement and the consent. consent can be given long term and short term. i would suspect a citizenship application would require a change in custody and long term consent.

Just out of curiosity, could you point out exactly where consent from the other parent is required in a minor citizenship application. I wasn't able to find any sign of it.

 

[rhcohen2014]

Just out of curiosity, could you point out exactly where consent from the other parent is required in a minor citizenship application. I wasn't able to find any sign of it.

beats me. i'm going off what other posters mentioned above when they were answering the question from the OP. perhaps someone who mentioned it above can guide you as to where to find the appropriate forms. i would suspect there is a significant difference between applying for a child's citizenship and taking them to a foreign country to live without the consent of the parent with primary custody, which is part of the OP original concern. there are many people on this forum that have mentioned needing written consent to bring their children to canada if the other parent is not present with them. i also suspect that if the mother does not want her children to have dual citizenship or live in a country without her there are ways for her to block applications submitted on her children's behalf.