+1(514) 937-9445 or Toll-free (Canada & US) +1 (888) 947-9445

Police Certificate requirement for countries where an individual spent 6+ months

Smile_Canada

Star Member
Feb 23, 2015
192
15
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
dpenabill said:
So CIC may tend to infer you stayed more than 183 days in the wrong country.

Tough spot if they want police certificates for additional countries just because of the lack of detail included in the Residency Calculator.

Main thing, though, if asked to submit a police certificate for any country in which more than 183 days were spent, is to be sure to provide a police certificate for any country which indeed is one where you spent 183 or more days . . . failure to submit the requested police certificate could be deemed a material omission.

And as I have emphasized elsewhere, it is never a good idea to rely on CIC not knowing something.

In the meantime, I have not yet seen a report that CIC is actually asking applicants , those with applications already in process, to supplement the application with police certificates for any country in which they spent 183 or more days within the four years prior to applying. Seems possible they will ask. Perhaps they will only make this request for selected applicants (such as those whose residency calculations reflect 183+ days abroad total). But as yet I have not seen a report they are in fact asking.
+1 to this.

Its better to declare properly how many days were spent in each country.
For Eg:
You take a vacation trip on the way to Australia for 15 days while visiting home country for 180+ days.
It would be worse if CIC asked for the Police clearance for Australia rather than home country.
 

Smile_Canada

Star Member
Feb 23, 2015
192
15
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
neutral said:
There is no place where I can give that information that's why they can't know it. There isn't a fraud. The only form is the Residence Calculator that is conceived to just count the days we are in Canada to meet the residency requirements so if I traveled to many countries in one trip, there is no way they can know how many days I stayed in each country.

I'm traveling to my home country on November so if my applications is still being processed, I'd take advantage and bring the Police Certificate with me just in case.
It is fraud similar to the one when u say i am not lying but i am not saying complete truth too intentionally.
 

Messi

Star Member
Mar 30, 2012
73
1
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
I haven't heard about this requirement when applied for my application, is it something with the new provisions or was from before?
 

neutral

Hero Member
Mar 19, 2015
509
26
Montreal
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
dpenabill said:
So CIC may tend to infer you stayed more than 183 days in the wrong country.
Why would they?

I'm indicating all the countries I visited during the trip, so there is not reason they'd only take in account the first one.

Let's do an easy example.
I made a trip that last 185 days, visiting 5 countries.
I indicate country A in "Destination" and countries B,C,D and E in "Reason".

So, if CIC may "tend to infer I stayed more than 183 days in country A" there would a SERIOUS math problem .... because if I just stayed 1 day in the other 4 countries, total would equal 187 days when the trip last only 185 days :eek:

Tough spot if they want police certificates for additional countries just because of the lack of detail included in the Residency Calculator.

Main thing, though, if asked to submit a police certificate for any country in which more than 183 days were spent, is to be sure to provide a police certificate for any country which indeed is one where you spent 183 or more days . . . failure to submit the requested police certificate could be deemed a material omission.

And as I have emphasized elsewhere, it is never a good idea to rely on CIC not knowing something.
Well, it'd be smarter to ask me for details about the trip, and then ask me to send them the police certificates according to my answer. Anyway, as I said, I don't have any problem sending them at their request.
 

neutral

Hero Member
Mar 19, 2015
509
26
Montreal
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
Smile_Canada said:
It is fraud similar to the one when u say i am not lying but i am not saying complete truth too intentionally.
That's not the law my friend.

I'm answering all they are asking in THEIR official forms.

There are many topics related to people that loves to send more papers than what CIC asks for.
People attaching T4's, recommendation letters, etc. You know, when you starts adding stuff nobody has asked for, there isn't limit. I'm the kind of guy who think that for bureaucratic purposes, you'd send only what they ask for as they follow procedures.

It's not a fraud in Canada follow official indications.
 

dpenabill

VIP Member
Apr 2, 2010
6,299
3,064
neutral said:
Why would they?

I'm indicating all the countries I visited during the trip, so there is not reason they'd only take in account the first one.

Let's do an easy example.
I made a trip that last 185 days, visiting 5 countries.
I indicate country A in "Destination" and countries B,C,D and E in "Reason".

So, if CIC may "tend to infer I stayed more than 183 days in country A" there would a SERIOUS math problem .... because if I just stayed 1 day in the other 4 countries, total would equal 187 days when the trip last only 185 days :eek:

Well, it'd be smarter to ask me for details about the trip, and then ask me to send them the police certificates according to my answer. Anyway, as I said, I don't have any problem sending them at their request.
To be clear, the current application form specifically requires the applicant to declare whether more than a total of six months was spent in another country in the last four years. A failure to disclose this, if it applies, would be fraud.

As noted multiple times, I do not know the actual content of the forms that applicants who applied before June 11, 2015 are being required to complete. So I do not know the precise content of what will be required of you before you take the oath.

There have been sufficient reports to reflect that the prohibitions forms that must be signed at the interview and prior to taking the oath have been modified relative to the recent changes in the law. Thus, at the least they refer to four years instead of three, and they relate to offences abroad in the last four years as well. Beyond that, the particular instructions or questions in the form will dictate how a given applicant must reply.

While technically there is arithmetic pursuant to which an applicant who has been abroad more than 183 days in the last four years might not have been abroad 183 days or more in a particular country, that's a nuance without significance. The range of what CIC may infer is, of course, dependent on the facts in the particular case.

Overall, applicants with applications still in process from before June 11, 2015 and who declared more than six months absence in the preceding four years, not counting time abroad before landing as a PR, might anticipate some delay compared to other routine applicants, while CIC conducts further background criminality checks. This may not affect every applicant who reported 183+ days abroad, but again it can be anticipated.

Whether such applicants will be given requests to submit police certificates is unclear . . . so far no one has reported this happening.
 

IN888658S

Star Member
Jul 10, 2015
73
0
Burnaby, BC, Canada
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
Hi dpenabill,
This post provides some insight to my current situation. My oath ceremony was scheduled and cancelled on June 12th. A CIC officer called me on June 01st and mentioned that my oath ceremony for which I had a written notification is cancelled.

I saw your post where you mentioned that current prohibitions provisions applies to applications in process as well (i.e. Prior to June 11th). I have lived and worked in the US for > 6 months during the preceding 4 years of my date of application, so it is likely that CIC may be doing FBI checks which could have caused them to mention to me that they are looking for "additional information". They couldn't have requested this from me, as I had applied in Sep 2014, and Police Certificate was not a requirement specified in the application form. This Bill must be mandating them to do some further checks to the applications in process, so applicants like me could be impacted?

Thoughts, please. Thanks.

Regards,
IN888658S
 

dpenabill

VIP Member
Apr 2, 2010
6,299
3,064
IN888658S said:
This post provides some insight to my current situation. My oath ceremony was scheduled and cancelled on June 12th. A CIC officer called me on June 01st and mentioned that my oath ceremony for which I had a written notification is cancelled.

I saw your post where you mentioned that current prohibitions provisions applies to applications in process as well (i.e. Prior to June 11th). I have lived and worked in the US for > 6 months during the preceding 4 years of my date of application, so it is likely that CIC may be doing FBI checks which could have caused them to mention to me that they are looking for "additional information". They couldn't have requested this from me, as I had applied in Sep 2014, and Police Certificate was not a requirement specified in the application form. This Bill must be mandating them to do some further checks to the applications in process, so applicants like me could be impacted?
Foremost, I do not know, and like others I am waiting for reports from applicants like you, regarding what steps CIC is taking relative to applications already in process. I would expect you to see what happens next somewhat soon.

As already noted, though, we do know that the new prohibitions provisions prescribed by the SCCA (oft called Bill C-24), which came into force June 11, 2015, apply to ALL applications being processed, regardless of when the application was made.

Thus, for all those who have not yet taken the oath, the time frame for convictions which prohibit the grant of citizenship is now four years rather than three. Additionally the scope of what criminal convictions, or still pending charges, will constitute a prohibition, now extends to offences abroad which, if committed in Canada, would be an indictable offence.

Since this requirement now applies, obviously CIC will have to do its due diligence to ascertain whether any applicants have such convictions abroad or pending charges abroad. The law is declarative, and mandatory. CIC is charged with the duty to not grant citizenship to any applicant who has had a conviction abroad for what would be an indictable offence in Canada, going back to four years prior to the date of the application, and of course no charges pending. So CIC must make sure no one takes the oath who is legally prohibited . . . So CIC MUST do the screening.

How CIC will go about this, again I do not know.

What I suggested above was that, at the least, applicants whose residency calculation indicates more than 183 days abroad can anticipate at least some delay while CIC does further background checking. It would be NO surprise, however, if eventually all such applicants get a request to declare whether they spent 183 days or more in any particular country, and/or a request to submit a police certificate from any country in which the applicant spent 183 days or more.

So hopefully applicants like you will report back here what next step CIC takes in your case. Also, when you are scheduled for the oath, it would be helpful if you report back here, as well as you can, what the prohibitions form specifically requires . . . I recognize that most people barely glance at the form and sign it almost mechanically, but that in large part is because most people have had no law enforcement contacts at all and there is no need to read the form in detail, there being no chance of any prohibition . . . but if you could read and report, that will be helpful for others going forward.
 

IN888658S

Star Member
Jul 10, 2015
73
0
Burnaby, BC, Canada
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
Hi dpenabill,
Thank you for your detailed note. This makes perfect sense. The delay could be attributed to CIC doing additional checks for the additional year due to the bill coming into effect on June 11, 2015. This is true in my case as I did live and work in the US for more than 183 days in the preceding 4 years from the date of my citizenship application.

With regard to > 183 declaration in the foreign country, I think we do declare it in the Residency Calculator. So CIC has access to it based on the information that we provided. There is reference to the Citizenship Act and Privacy Act in the application that allows CIC to provide personal information to foreign governments. My understanding is they would they would request further background checks based on this bill. I would be surprised if they request it from us, again given the fact that they accepted processing the application without it.

However, our rationale is our rationale. CIC's could be very different. I will post information as I find more about about my case. Thank you.

Regards,
IN888658S
 

IN888658S

Star Member
Jul 10, 2015
73
0
Burnaby, BC, Canada
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
So hopefully applicants like you will report back here what next step CIC takes in your case. Also, when you are scheduled for the oath, it would be helpful if you report back here, as well as you can, what the prohibitions form specifically requires . . . I recognize that most people barely glance at the form and sign it almost mechanically, but that in large part is because most people have had no law enforcement contacts at all and there is no need to read the form in detail, there being no chance of any prohibition . . . but if you could read and report, that will be helpful for others going forward.
Hi dpenabill,
Just so that I understand this clearly, you implied that in-process applicants will receive some kind of form request (before their oath ceremony? during the oath ceremony?) from CIC to sign a form based on this Bill. The content of this form could gave details that would pertain to prohibitions based on the assessment of CIC on case by case basis. You are requesting us to share those experiences here. Please ascertain. Thanks.

Regards,
IN888658S
 

neutral

Hero Member
Mar 19, 2015
509
26
Montreal
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
dpenabill said:
To be clear, the current application form specifically requires the applicant to declare whether more than a total of six months was spent in another country in the last four years. A failure to disclose this, if it applies, would be fraud.

As noted multiple times, I do not know the actual content of the forms that applicants who applied before June 11, 2015 are being required to complete. So I do not know the precise content of what will be required of you before you take the oath.

Whether such applicants will be given requests to submit police certificates is unclear . . . so far no one has reported this happening.
Yes, I agree. It would be a fraud if when the form specifically requires the applicant to declare whether more than a total of six months was spent in another country in the last four years and he doesn't.

I've just finished reading every single page, even the checklist of my application (applied before June 11, 2015) and nowhere I'm asked to indicate that neither to send police certificates in any case.

I'll let you know if CIC ask for them at some point.
 

neutral

Hero Member
Mar 19, 2015
509
26
Montreal
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
IN888658S said:
Hi dpenabill,
Thank you for your detailed note. This makes perfect sense. The delay could be attributed to CIC doing additional checks for the additional year due to the bill coming into effect on June 11, 2015. This is true in my case as I did live and work in the US for more than 183 days in the preceding 4 years from the date of my citizenship application.

With regard to > 183 declaration in the foreign country, I think we do declare it in the Residency Calculator. So CIC has access to it based on the information that we provided. There is reference to the Citizenship Act and Privacy Act in the application that allows CIC to provide personal information to foreign governments. My understanding is they would they would request further background checks based on this bill. I would be surprised if they request it from us, again given the fact that they accepted processing the application without it.

However, our rationale is our rationale. CIC's could be very different. I will post information as I find more about about my case. Thank you.

Regards,
IN888658S
I doubt that if your oath ceremony was already scheduled, it got canceled because of your time in US because they already knew that.
 

IN888658S

Star Member
Jul 10, 2015
73
0
Burnaby, BC, Canada
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
Hi neutral,
I hope so as well. But, the Bill C-24 timing and the fact that CIC has been mandated to do prohibitions checks for 4 years from the date of the application might indicate that they may not have done these checks earlier. Again, this is my speculation - there is nothing else that comes in mind for now atleast!

Regards,
IN888658S
 

neutral

Hero Member
Mar 19, 2015
509
26
Montreal
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
It's been already a while that Canada and US share many information.

Anyway, let's just wait and see .... 8)
 

IN888658S

Star Member
Jul 10, 2015
73
0
Burnaby, BC, Canada
Job Offer........
Pre-Assessed..
Hi neutral,

Sure, If it is indeed the FBI checks for the the US, then we know that they are going to be delayed. As per their site :

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/identity-history-summary-checks

On September 7, 2014, CJIS installed a new IT system. As a result of this installation, we are experiencing delays in processing. Please be assured that each issue is being identified and resolved as quickly as possible, but at this time anticipated processing time for an Identity History Summary is approximately 11-13 weeks. Allow additional time for mail delivery.
What is puzzling for me though, is the fingerprints are required for FBI Identity History Summary. So, really CIC can't do that on their own as we didn't provide fingerprints. If they have to go this route then they have to request it from us. If not, I think they would do a National Instant Criminal Background Check, which hopefully would have a shorter turnaround from FBI!

Let's see what happens next :)

Regards,
IN888658S