I am a Canadian citizen by descent (first gen). I sponsored my minor child for PR but after a month from first landing we had to return to our home country due to family issues. Then I applied for grant of citizenship under Minor 5(2). I got AOR on June 2025 and it is still in progress until now. I requested for ATIP and learned that my minor child's application was sent to Program Support Unit (SPU) due to no Canadian address, applicant appears to reside abroad. I indicated our home country address in the application since my minor child is currently residing outside Canada. Under Subsection 5(2), a minor does not need to fulfill physical presence and can apply as long as they have a Canadian parent and landed PR. It doesn't say that minor needs to be in Canada when applying for grant of citizenship. Anyone on the same boat?
Minor 5(2) application submitted while outside Canada
- Thread starter Flomich
- Start date
Have you considered that the recent legal changes quite probably make your child already a citizen (by descent from you)? That would be my understanding. The requirement for 1095 days of resdiency in Canada will apply going forward, but since your child was (clearly) born before the law was amended, should be included in the grandfathering provisions.
In which case: it may make more sense to withdraw the application for grant of citizenship, and instead file for the proof of citizenship. Cheaper, clearly no requirement for the presence in Canada, etc.
(Please do check this before you withdraw, I am not as familiar with the procedure for those applying for citizenship by descent under the recent amendments to the law.)
I have thought about the newly passed Bill C-3, but when I checked IRCC website, it says that when a minor is a PR, I have to apply for grant of citizenship to get a certificate of citizenship. This means if I want to apply for proof of citizenship thru citizenship by descent, I have to renounce my child's PR status to be eligible.
https://www.canada.ca/en/immigratio...itizenship/proof-citizenship/eligibility.html
Could you specify where you saw this? I looked at the site here but did not see anything I interpreted that way.
I think this is the primary (only?) text that covers the situation for your child: "If you were born outside of Canada before December 15, 2025, you’re likely a Canadian citizen if your parent was also a Canadian citizen when you were born."
I say 'only' because the way I read it, your child IS a citizen - and technically I do not believe they can grant your child citizenship if already a citizen. (Although of course unintentional errors can occur)
I tried going through on how to apply for proof of citizenship. (https://www.canada.ca/en/immigratio...itizenship/proof-citizenship/eligibility.html) There's a question if minor is a PR and when you select yes, it tells you this:
You need to apply for the child’s Canadian citizenship
To get a citizenship certificate, you must apply for the child to become a Canadian citizen.If we approve the application, they’ll get the certificate after the citizenship ceremony.
Do not apply directly for a citizenship certificate (online or on paper). If you do, we’ll return your application.
So from my understanding, I cannot apply for proof of citizenship if my child is a PR.
But your child is no longer a PR. By automatically becoming a citizen with the new law, the PR status was terminated on the spot, as a citizen of Canada cannot be a permanent resident.
I understand the confusion, but you can absolutely apply for a citizenship certificate for your child, answer no to the PR question, and if you want, add an explanation letter to clarify the situation, and maybe even ask what to do with the PR card, which the child, in theory, cannot use anymore.
As weird as it sounds, I believe @Seym has this exactly right - and what I had wrong is that I forgot that automatically becoming a citizen invalidated the PR status.
We could do a sideline marginal discussion that would continue for ages about cases that both the law and IRCC's instructions have not yet thought of, conceived of, drawn up an answer to, etc. Short form: while their online forms are a good start, they sometimes don't cover every eventuality - and the page you got to did not address your specific case. (Because it's new and weird!)
I think they haven't quite dealt with it because ... they just haven't. I suppose they could say that you should have applied under the 'temporary measures' (for just such cases) but you didn't, so what does it matter? The kid is a citizen now, just without the papers.
And again, I think this is the correct answer. The only thing I have to add is the following:
-For the time being, if the kid needs to travel to Canada, the PR card is / should be still valid.
-When you apply for the citizenship certificate, keep a complete copy and then take that whole package and apply for a passport for the kid at the closest embassy/consulate. They will only do a rush job if travel is pending, but you should still get it done - just in case. Insist. They issue these passports - which sometimes they'll call temporary passports, or with validity only for a year or two (normal for minors esp very young children), on the basis that the child is a presumed citizen. This is absolutely normal and is done all the time - the only thing that's changed is that now the child is a citizen due to the recent changes. Repeat - IS a citizen.
FWIW, I have a child whose situation was similar to yours - except that we got PR status and then citizenship for the child (albeit still in Canada) before this court case. I've seen a comment here that what should happen (retroactively) to my child is loss of the 5(2) citizenship (which would also invalidate I presume the PR status held way back), and the child would now become a citizen by descent (more than one generation) instead of by naturalization (meaning the by descent rules would apply going forward). [For the record I think that's nonsense - could hypothetically happen if anyone had any interest in litigating it, I suppose, but there is no such party, because ... to what end?]
I can see it happen years from now, when someone in your child's situation will argue that having been naturalized would allow them to transmit the citizenship to their own kid, but retroactively subjecting them to 1095 days of "physical presence" to transmit their citizenship after they went through the whole naturalization process is actually detrimental and that they should not be "punished" by a law which didn't exist when they got their ceremony and which aimed at correction another inequity.
I'd be curious to see how it plays, if it ever happens.
Yes, I shouldn't rule anything out, it's always possible some asinine twit could come along in a few years and decide something got out of hand, and my kid would have to prove that it's irrelevant anyway as resided in Canada well past the 1095 day requirement anyway (implying then having to prove that with documents...).
Which, after all, the whole way we got here is a bunch of asinine twits over-reacted to one perceived issue, and implemented a restriction on citizenship by descent without considering the issue carefully in the first place (that people who spent most of their lives in Canada might challenge the fact there'd been no accommodation for that).
[That said I think they've rather now overdone the correction by making it open to all by descent seemingly without limit, except going forward. And that's going to cause problems, like ... what if they all try to vote? (Okay I know the answer to that, the election period is so short it's actually somewhat difficult to vote from abroad - not impossible but not easy.]
Just putting a sort-of marker down for this for others to note - that although it's easy to say that on paper 'the child IS a citizen', it's not exactly correct, and that extends to the PR status being invalidated. Neither happen 'automatically.'
I'm not a lawyer so I'm going to put it this way: the child / anyone in a situation where they should be a citizen under the law is not recognized as a citizen until the process is complete (and eg a citizenship certificate issued). With the documentation in hand and presented to IRCC (or an embassy or whatever), but prior to complete evaluation*, I think we can say that the individual is a presumed citizen, and the government would - in most respects - be expected to provide essential - necessary - services. (But subject to serious limits, like some limitation on costs, since not yet in any system to bear those costs). Need to travel to Canada and all seems in order? They should (and I believe will) issue a passport - at least if all bonafides etc.
The PR status, in the unusual situation like this? Well, presumed citizen means ... presumed invalidity of PR status. But in practical terms, I think they would not actually do so (retroactively or otherwise) until late in the process of approving/issuing the citizenship certificate. Because cancelling it too early would potentially harm the PR-presumed citizen, and if citizenship couldn't be recognized for some reason, the invalidation of the PR status would be invalid, too.
So keep the PR card for now.
Eventually they'll figure this stuff out, after some lawyers and administrators have had to deal with it. They might even come up with policies like "for those who are already PRs with valid PR cards, we won't issue a passport until citizenship confirmed, because that individual can travel to Canada using the PR card." (Or they might decide something else instead, or if there aren't many cases, maybe it'll just be footnotes here and there in some admin manual or email chain internal to IRCC and lost to history, unless it gets to the courts)
* We say evaluation but it's mostly checking docs and the like - it's not some subjective evaluation of 'worthiness.' Which might be tediously long, checking documents and validity. But for those for whom the right goes back to birth in Canada (via parents and further back), the only exceptions (I think) at present are those who were eg born of foreign diplomats and the like. (And they have mistakenly granted citizenship in a few cases like this and it got messy and legal years after the fact - if it's mistaken, they can strip the citizenship). [editadd: I'm sure I've left out/not thought of other cases where one would not be eligible based on parenthood, eg someone having renounced Canadian citizenship in past and the timing of that.]
Last edited:
As has been discussed albeit mired in speculative tangents, given the December 2025 change in law your child is a Canadian citizen by descent (Section 3(1)(b) Citizenship Act). Moreover, they are "deemed" to be a citizen "from the time" they were born.
To be clear, the exception to Section 3(1)(b) regarding those born outside Canada after the first generation (Section 3(3) Citizenship Act) does not apply to children born prior to December 15, 2025. So, again, your child is deemed to be a citizen from the day they were born.
Thus the first response by @Seym covers the situation:
That is: in the application for citizenship certificate just answer the question about being a PR in the negative and include LoE. IRCC will request more information if it needs further clarification.
Regardless how the technical mechanics work (such as recognition of non-PR status), your child is not eligible for a grant of citizenship since they are a citizen. So the 5(2) application is invalid.
(By the way, while the lack of a Canadian address may be what triggered the referral to the PSU, that could be cause to investigate even though it is not itself grounds for denying the application . . . makes sense that applications for individuals living outside Canada are subject to increased scrutiny . . . and given the change in law, as of December 15 last year your child was no longer eligible for a Section 5(2) grant of citizenship anyway.)
Beyond that . . . wrestling with speculative contingencies . . .
Do not be distracted by the discussion of speculative contingencies and what-if scenarios.
This is, of course, assuming your personal status as a Canadian citizen by descent is established, meaning you have been issued a certificate of citizenship. Otherwise there would be some factual matters to establish, and variable ways things could go depending on the particular factual circumstances.
No need for you or your child to get tangled in any of that. Your citizenship is established. You are aware of the current law and its effect. Your child is a Canadian citizen and thus not eligible for a grant of citizenship, not eligible to obtain "naturalized" citizenship. So, your child will not be able to pass on Canadian citizenship by descent to their own child (if born outside Canada), in turn, unless your child spends at least 1095 days in Canada before that child (your grandchild) is born (which, to be clear, is a rather low bar).
Given the status of the 5(2) application, referred to PSU and thus already subject to elevated scrutiny, it is likely, perhaps highly likely, that sooner or later that application will be denied with advice to apply for a certificate of citizenship. Not because your child is currently outside Canada but because they are already deemed a citizen since birth . . . because of that they do not have valid PR status (technically their status as a PR is not "terminated," which only happens in specified circumstances; but they nonetheless do not have valid PR status . . . they are a citizen not a PR who would be eligible for a grant of citizenship).
It would be imprudent to test the system and pursue the grant of citizenship as a PR. That is not to say that would not succeed. Or, to be precise, ostensibly succeed. Again, since the Section 5(2) application is already being processed by the PSU, it is more likely this application will be rejected (unless it is withdrawn before being rejected, which would be a prudent thing to do). The prudent course is to withdraw that application and make the application for a certificate of citizenship.
But what-if, for example, you had remained in Canada and there was no delay due a PSU referral, and IRCC proceeded to finalize the Section 5(2) application, granting your child citizenship?
What-If Scenarios . . .
First, to be clear, no one who is a Canadian citizen (pursuant to any of the provisions prescribing who is a citizen) will be "retroactively" subject to the physical presence requirement for passing on citizenship by descent to second (or later) generation children born outside Canada. The limitation applicable to children born outside Canada after the first generation, as prescribed by Section 3(3) of the Citizenship Act, only applies to children born after this change in the law came into force . . . prospectively, not retroactively.
And to be clear, the reason why the first generation limitation did not previously apply to the children of naturalized citizens was because they were not citizens by descent. Even with the changes, the limitation still does not apply to naturalized citizens who are not citizens by descent.
What has changed is that some naturalized citizens might now also be a citizen by descent and the limitation does apply to citizens by descent.
A person can be a Canadian citizen pursuant to the operation of more than one of the provisions prescribing who is a Canadian citizen. Who is a Canadian citizen is prescribed in subsections 3(1)((a) to 3(1)(r) of the Citizenship Act . . . yeah, a lot of ways and various circumstances in which a person can be a Canadian citizen.
For any Canadian citizen who was born outside Canada and who is a citizen pursuant to the operation of Section 3(1)(b) (citizenship by descent), Section 3(3) precludes their passing on Canadian citizenship to their child born outside Canada unless they meet the 1095 day physical presence requirement.
If a person is now a Canadian citizen pursuant to 3(1)(b) that is not changed or taken away by the fact that person has previously gone through the naturalization process.
So, for such an individual, now that they are a citizen by descent (pursuant to Section 3(1)(b)) notwithstanding the previous grant of citizenship (a citizen based on Section 3(1)(c)), there is no basis to claim that the Section 3(3) limitation does not apply to a child born outside Canada in the future.
That is, it does not matter whether the parent previously obtained a grant of citizenship through the naturalization process, if they are NOW (as of December 2025) a citizen (again, one might say "also a citizen") pursuant to Section 3(1)(b), the first generation limitation applies.
BUT . . .
For many of these naturalized Canadian citizens who became a citizen by descent, as of their birth, pursuant to Section 3(1)(b) based on the 2025 change in law, it is not as if they will be automatically recognized as such absent an application for a certificate of citizenship documenting their status. Their GCMS records might continue to only reflect/report their citizenship status based on naturalization . . . unless and until there is a transaction in which citizenship by descent is recognized.
Make no mistake, the change in law will still apply. Ignorance of the change will not block its effect.
The question is whether or not IRCC catches it if there is an application for a citizenship certificate for a child born outside Canada based on the parent's status as a "naturalized citizen" without disclosing that the parent is also a citizen by descent pursuant to the changes in the law. What actually happens will depend on the facts and circumstances in the particular case. But if IRCC recognizes the parent is a citizen pursuant to Section 3(1)(b), the limitations of Section 3(3) will apply.
Thanks @dpenabill for the detailed answer, including for the misuse of the word "terminated" in my original post. Cheers 
