The IRCC citizenship application instructions make it clear: any information not in an official language needs to be properly translated.
Anecdotal reports of personal experience amply illustrate that this policy is not uniformly or strictly enforced, that it is sometimes enforced but many times not enforced.
In particular, the translation of information which is not in an official language, in passports, is one of those areas in which IRCC practices are often more flexible and lenient than the IRCC policy.
Nonetheless, the safest approach, as always, is to follow the instructions and comply with the policy. Otherwise, it can be difficult to forecast how flexible or lenient IRCC will be in a particular individual's case.
For qualified applicants, the difference is mostly about the risk of inconvenience and delay due to non-routine processing, which in this context is usually limited to a follow-up request (at or following the interview) for the applicant to submit proper translations. So a failure to bring proper translations to the interview usually risks no more than having to obtain and submit them anyway, and incurring the delay that results in.
. . . does the entire passport have to be translated or only time frames after we became PR?
There are no exceptions stated in the policy, the rule for providing a translation. And, the scope of examination of documents, generally, can be far broader than the primary purpose for presenting the document. Thus, for example, while examiners (processing agents, interviewers, or such) are ordinarly focused on particular information, such as being focused on stamps showing dates of travel during the relevant time period, if the document is in any respect relevant, there are no fixed parameters limiting what an examiner can look at and consider . . . for example, any part of a document can be relevant for purposes of assessing the authenticity of the document. So, in general, the rule is to translate everything not in English or French.
This throws this query into the realm of what are the risks if this or that is not translated, and the recognition that it readily appears IRCC is not overly oppressive or strict about translations.
It thus comes down to a personal judgment.
I would offer this: in some circumstances, a partial translation might tend to invite questions, but of course that would depend on the particulars.
It doesn't mention anywhere on IRCC website that we need to translate all the pages of our passport . . .
. . . Again from an official standpoint (IRCC website) nothing seems to point to a stamp translation requirement
Stamps are not mentioned in particular in the general instructions, that is true. But there are numerous references in the citizenship instructions to requiring translations for
any documents not in English or French, and as reflected in literally hundreds of IRCC forms and guidelines, IRCC policy clearly requires the submission of proper translations for any document not in English or French.
Instructions with notice to attend test/interview:
I have not seen a recent version of the instructions sent to the applicant, and over time this has varied some from local office to local office. Of those I have seen, including the instructions I personally received, the list of documents to bring to the apppointment included, specifically, the following:
"Passports (current and all previous) and certified translation if any stamps/visas are not in English/French"
And as noted, that is consistent with IRCC policy generally, across the board, for virtually any circumstance in which a client is submitting or presenting documents to IRCC, that policy requiring a proper translation.
Longer Explanation:
Caution: Make no mistake, the policy, the rule, is that if a document submitted to IRCC includes any information in a language other than one of the official languages, the document needs to be accompanied by a properly authenticated translation of all information not in one of the official languages.
This applies across the board, for almost every instance, for nearly every document submitted to IRCC attendant the processing of an application. This is the general policy, not just for citizenship applicants but almost all applications to IRCC. (See, for example, IRCC FAQ governing immigration applications generally, which states that unless IRCC says otherwise, all supporting documents must be in English or French, and specifies that otherwise a translation must be submitted. There are literally
hundreds of IRCC forms, instruction guides, PDIs, and Operational guidelines which all say basically the same thing, that "any document not in English or French" needs to be accompanied by a proper translation, from documents for eTA processing to every kind of visa application there is, including requests for a citizenship certificate by those who are a Canadian citizen.)
As for citizenship applications in particular, this is referred to in the citizenship application instructions multiple times.
see
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/information/applications/guides/CIT0002ETOC.asp
for PDI also see
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/tools/cit/admin/general/translation.asp
But, as anecdotal reports above illustrate, it is clear that IRCC does not so mechanically and strictly apply such policies as to be unreasonably oppressive, and again, many reports reflect
no problems despite the absence of translations for some information not in an official language. I can add my own experience to such reports (but in my case the information was minimal, not in Arabic but rather another language using the Latin alphabet, and relatively easy to understand for anyone fluent in French and to a significant extent even English).
To be clear, in contrast to the reports of no problems despite the absence of a translation, there are also many personal, anecdotal reports from applicants whose application processing was delayed because they were required to follow-up the interview by submitting a properly authenticated translation of passport stamps
even where there were only a few stamps which the applicant believed were easily understood without translation.
Reminder: translations by the applicant or a family member do not comply with the requirements.
So, whether to risk it is a personal choice. Again, the risk is merely that IRCC will require the applicant to provide the translation, which will delay the process some, but ordinarily will not put the outcome of the application in jeopardy. And there is little indication that the absence of a translation alone risks triggering other non-routine processing, such as RQ. (But of course if there are concerns about the applicant's travel history underlying IRCC's decision to require the translation, that would be different. And there are both forum anecdotal reports and FC decisions reflecting such situations.)
Relatively safe bet:
In general, it
appears it is probably (but not always) safe to go without a translation if the amount of information involved is relatively minimal and the respective stamp or visa, or whatever, is otherwise easily understood, and in particular if dates are readily understood without a translation. But do not mistake this for the rule. And the risk of being required to submit a translation goes up the more information there is in a non-official language, and the risk goes up a lot more if the absence of a translation leaves any doubt as to the meaning or significance of information in the passport.
General caution about what can be learned from anecdotal reports:
As always, remember that anecdotal reports are
NOT a reliable indicator of the rule or policy. They only reflect an
example of what CAN happen based on an experience showing what has happened for a particular individual, and they do not reflect what will or must happen to another applicant, and they absolutely do not illuminate what in particular cannot happen.
Overly broad generalizations based on anecdotal experiences is perhaps the most pervasive error seen in forums like this.
This applies in particular to the various anecdotal reports indicating no problem despite not having all passport stamps translated. The fact that IRCC has been lenient for ten or a hundred applicants is never a guarantee the rule will not be strictly enforced for some other individual.
