links18 said:
. . . they can delay your application for a long time if they use your residence abroad as a pretense to question your PP declarations.
To be clear, it is highly unlikely that IRCC citizenship officers employ any
"pretense" in assessing an applicants actual physical presence.
Extended absences while the application is pending have been a
reason to question the applicant's residency or presence for a long time, going back to
before Harper became the PM. For example, a passport stamp indicating a return to Canada shortly before a scheduled test/interview was an explicit
reason to question the applicant's residency pursuant to written policy at least as far back as a 2005 Operational Bulletin.
There are genuine investigatory reasons underlying this policy, not the least of which is that residing abroad evidences strong residential ties abroad, so in these situations CIC had (and IRCC will continue to have) an obligation to at least more thoroughly verify the applicant's claims about time in Canada.
IRCC personnel (with some errant exceptions, perhaps, which is to be expected) are not usually or generally engaged in a
gotcha exercise, let alone employing pretenses to make the process more difficult for legitimate, qualified PRs. They have a job to do, which is to apply and enforce the rules and regulations, the law, governing the grant of Canadian citizenship. If there is any evidence or indication warranting a more thorough probing of an applicant, for the purpose of
verifying the applicant's qualification, they have a mandate to do due diligence.
During the time Harper was PM, and especially when Jason Kenney and then Chris Alexander were, respectively, the Minister of CIC, very severe policies and practices were employed which imposed more scrutiny of all applicants, and RQ level scrutiny of a large enough percentage of applicants that the system nearly crashed, and overall appeared to approach a large percentage of applicants with an almost draconian degree of skepticism. CIC seemed obsessed, at the time, with thoroughly investigating any applicant for which there was any hint of fraud or even an effort to obtain what was described as a
passport-of-convenience, and especially targeting any applicant perceived to have
applied-on-the-way-to-the-airport.
During that time, some applications may have been deliberately, so to say,
shelved, in anticipation that the applicant (who had left Canada after applying) would eventually run afoul of the PR Residency Obligation, and thereby no longer be eligible for citizenship even though that individual did meet the qualifications when the application was made. We never had any direct evidence of this, but there was a significant amount of circumstantial evidence given the number of cases which literally saw no progress for years.
There is no hint in any reporting, none that I have seen, which suggests that IRCC is approaching applicants with anywhere near this degree of skepticism, with any agenda to stall processing for applicants perceived to be residing abroad.
But, given the change in requirements not too long prior to the Liberals forming the government, the number of overall applications made since CIC became IRCC is way, way down from historical averages, the base line amount of actual presence is much higher thus limiting applicants to those who have been more established in Canada for longer, and the
intent-to-continue-residing in Canada provision still techncially applies, so the risk of residing abroad after applying has been much higher. This probably has dramatically reduced the number who apply and soon depart. All of which means there are undoubtedly way, way fewer applicants now who fit the profile of an applicant who might be perceived to have
applied-on-the-way-to-the-airport.
As noted before, regardless the
intent-to-continue-residing in Canada provision, residing abroad while the citizenship application is pending is likely to elevate the
risk of non-routine processing, perhaps including RQ, and depending on the actual facts and circumstances (not the least of which is how strong the applicant's case is otherwise), might invite a more severe degree of skepticism.
It should be noted, however, that even at the peak of the Harper-era targeting of applicants perceived to have
applied-on-the-way-to-the-airport, more than a few applicants who went abroad for more or less obvious
temporary purposes, like to complete an advanced degree program, reported
NO problem, and were typically processed timely, taking the oath within the then more common time line. Even then, the approach was not punitive (with some exceptions). It was intended to apply and enforce the rules and regulations, albeit perhaps driven by more or less paranoia, less reason, disregarding the detrimental impact on scores and scores of qualified, deserving PRs trying to take the citizenship step in establishing their lives as full Canadians.
