Q's ...Validity of Obtained Police Certificate...URGENT

[aries9811]

In the Recent requirement says that Police Clearance should be submitted from Other Countries where residency was more than 6 months in past 4 yrs. Can anyone advice, Will it be still valid for submission if is dated (Obtained)quite several months old from date of submission of citizenship application ?
Also, obtain this document itself consumes several months ?

Please clarify

 

[Politren]

Ask dpenabill for that and if you have any other questions too. He is the man.

 

[dpenabill]

In the Recent requirement says that Police Clearance should be submitted from Other Countries where residency was more than 6 months in past 4 yrs. Can anyone advice, Will it be still valid for submission if is dated (Obtained)quite several months old from date of submission of citizenship application ?
Also, obtain this document itself consumes several months ?

Please clarify

To clarify, currently the application requires the applicant to disclose presence in another country totaling six months in the previous four years. No residency in that country required. That is, unlike the police certificate requirements for applications like Express Entry, this is not based on living in the other country, but on presence. Periodic two, three week holidays adding up to six months or more over the course of the four years requires the applicant to disclose this in the application itself . . . apart from and in addition to the disclosures made in the physical presence calculation. (This is subject to change. It is clear that IRCC is revising many of its online instructions under Minister McCallum's leadership, and it would not surprise me to see the citizenship police certificate requirement revised to conform to similar requirements for other types of applications. Always follow the current instructions at the time of applying.)

If the applicant is required to disclose this presence in another country, adding up to six months total over the course of four years, the applicant must also submit a police certificate from that country.

The instructions regarding this are always subject to change, so foremost be sure to read the application form itself carefully and the guide for applying for citizenship carefully, and as always follow the instructions.

The form and the guide currently offer little detail about obtaining police certificates.

The general information at the IRCC site regarding police certificates appears to encompass certificates for citizenship as well as those required for PR applications.

See http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/information/security/police-cert/intro.asp
titled "How to get a police certificate (police check)"

And http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/information/security/police-cert/
which is similarly titled "How to get a police certificate"

The second one has links to country specific instructions and is sometimes referred to as IRCC's online tool for obtaining police certificates.

The first one is a general overview about police certificates.

It states:

"For countries where you have lived for six months or more," the police certificate must be issued after the last time you lived in that country.

That appears geared more to PR applicants than citizenship applicants. I would strongly suggest that the certificate be issued after the last time you were in that country, or at least concurrent with the last time you were in that country. (Remember, for the citizenship requirement, at least currently, it is not based on having lived in the other country, but on total amount of presence in that country over the four year time frame.)

Alternatively, the certificate should be no more than six months old at the time of applying.

Indeed, in the past the general rule was that certificates should be no more than six months old at the time of the application for which they are required. And this is now the specific rule governing the country a PR applicant is living in at the time of applying. Thus, for example, if there have been recent trips to the country, probably best to submit a police certificate no more than six months old.

 

[aries9811]

Hi dpenall,

Thanks for replying with so much details. I am wondering with the new changes in C6 Bill and the processing time taken to obtain police certificate itself is time consuming (2-3 months). It will be better to obtain those early. I hope they increase the validity on police certificate also.

Thanks again.

 

[aries9811]

Can you also, elaborate how is 4 years considered i.e day of becoming PR or Calendar Yr ?
Lets say
2012 - became PR (Outside) for whole yr.
2013 - Inside Canada = 5 months
2014 - Inside Canada =1yr
2015 - Inside... = 1 Yrs
2016 - Inside (As of now)


Thanks again.

 

[Diplomatru]

Can you also, elaborate how is 4 years considered i.e day of becoming PR or Calendar Yr ?
Lets say
2012 - became PR (Outside) for whole yr.
2013 - Inside Canada = 5 months
2014 - Inside Canada =1yr
2015 - Inside... = 1 Yrs
2016 - Inside (As of now)


Thanks again.

you should use the online calculator on CIC website to get the most accurate information

 

[dpenabill]

For purposes of the police certificate requirement, which derives from the prohibitions, the four years that matter are those four years immediately preceding the date the application for citizenship is made. This has no direct relationship to the calculation of physical presence, and thus the online calculator is irrelevant.

As I elaborated regarding in another topic very recently, Bill C-6 will not affect the duration period for prohibitions.

Relative to the requirement to submit a police certificate, the main prohibition is the one which prohibits an applicant from being granted citizenship if within the four years preceding the date of applying the applicant was convicted of a crime abroad which is the equivalent of an indictable offence in Canada.

For example, for an applicant who applies today, March 22, 2016, the four years that matter for purposes of the prohibition and police certificate requirement would be March 22, 2012 to March 22, 2016. Note, however, the prohibitions also apply during the entire time the application is in process, right up to taking the oath.

It does not appear you are qualified for citizenship as yet, not under the current law (minimum 1460 days actual presence in Canada). To assess when you will become eligible the online physical presence calculator is indeed the best resource.

I'd guess you are watching to see if and when Bill C-6 is adopted and its revised presence requirements come into force. If these were in force it appears you would be eligible later this year, probably before the new law comes into force (assuming it will be adopted and come into force). So you are probably among that group of PRs who are likely to suddenly be qualified the day the new 3/5 rule takes effect (again assuming that happens). I suspect there will be a huge number of PRs in a similar situation. There is no online calculator available yet for the 3/5 rule. Will not be unless and until the new law takes effect. That said, for any PR who does not spend an extensive amount of time outside Canada, and who is not looking for credit based on time in Canada prior to becoming a PR, it is very easy to just look at the calendar and add up the days present in Canada. When that number exceeds 1095 (within five years of course), the PR will be eligible IF and When the provisions in Bill C-6 take effect.

 

[Godzilla9]

I don't know what is going on in CIC in nowadays but when I applied for PR back in 2009, CIC was specific when said that all certificates had to be maximum 3 months old.

Then, I applied for PR in the US and left for a different country for work. I informed CIC that I am not in the US anymore but a year later they requested that I submit a renewed clearance from the US which did not make sense to me. What was said above that certificate must be issued after the last day in that country is logical but from my experience with CIC not everything they do is logical.

 

[robw]

If the applicant is required to disclose this presence in another country, adding up to six months total over the course of four years, the applicant must also submit a police certificate from that country.

It used to be six consecutive months, not six cumulative months, right?

 

[dpenabill]

It used to be six consecutive months, not six cumulative months, right?

There was no general requirement for PRs applying for citizenship to provide police certificates prior to last year, prior to when Bill C-24 provisions expanding the scope of prohibitions came into force (applicable to all applicants regardless when the application was made, thus applicable to applicants who applied under the 3/4 rule as well as new applicants under the 4/6 rule).

As I recall, the first version of the new application after these provisions came in force, last June, was the same as it is currently, as to who must submit a police certificate with the application, and that it was and still is based on six months cumulative presence.

For similar requirements in, for example, making an Express Entry application, or for spousal sponsored PR applications, living or residing in the other country for more than six months triggers the requirement to submit a police certificate. However, this too is not dependent on being in the other country exclusively for a consecutive six months. But it is based on living or residing in the other country for a period of six months. (The FAQ example, as best I recall, is that two or three week absences from the other country still count as living in the other country if that is where the individual's primary place of abode is located. Thus, for example, if a person moves into an apartment in Paris March 1, 2014, and rents that apartment to be where he lives through the end of August, 2014, that triggered the requirement to submit a police certificate from France even if that individual periodically left France for one or three weeks at a time during those six months.)

But it would be a mistake to parse the requirement or focus on its technicalities.

In all the cases where the police certificate is requested or required, it is not as if the police certificate is an element of eligibility. The police certificates are, rather, merely evidentiary relative to whether or not the subject has any criminal history in the respective country. The element of eligibility for PR applications, for example, is admissibility; the element of eligibility for citizenship is not having a statutory prohibition. Thus the real issue is whether there is a criminal record for the individual in that country.

In particular, IRCC can require applicants to submit police certificates from any country the individual visited even if briefly.

But as a standard practice, as part of the application itself:
-- for citizenship any applicant who spent a cumulative six months total, over the course of the relevant four years, is required to disclose this and submit a police certificate for that country
-- for Express Entry or spouse sponsored PR applications, the requirement to include a police certificate is triggered for any country in which the applicant lived for six months or more

But again, IRCC can nonetheless otherwise request applicants to submit police certificates even if the individual was in the respective country less than that amount of time.

 

[robw]

There was no general requirement for PRs applying for citizenship to provide police certificates prior to last year, prior to when Bill C-24 provisions expanding the scope of prohibitions came into force (applicable to all applicants regardless when the application was made, thus applicable to applicants who applied under the 3/4 rule as well as new applicants under the 4/6 rule).

As I recall, the first version of the new application after these provisions came in force, last June, was the same as it is currently, as to who must submit a police certificate with the application, and that it was and still is based on six months cumulative presence.

For similar requirements in, for example, making an Express Entry application, or for spousal sponsored PR applications, living or residing in the other country for more than six months triggers the requirement to submit a police certificate. However, this too is not dependent on being in the other country exclusively for a consecutive six months. But it is based on living or residing in the other country for a period of six months. (The FAQ example, as best I recall, is that two or three week absences from the other country still count as living in the other country if that is where the individual's primary place of abode is located. Thus, for example, if a person moves into an apartment in Paris March 1, 2014, and rents that apartment to be where he lives through the end of August, 2014, that triggered the requirement to submit a police certificate from France even if that individual periodically left France for one or three weeks at a time during those six months.)

But it would be a mistake to parse the requirement or focus on its technicalities.

In all the cases where the police certificate is requested or required, it is not as if the police certificate is an element of eligibility. The police certificates are, rather, merely evidentiary relative to whether or not the subject has any criminal history in the respective country. The element of eligibility for PR applications, for example, is admissibility; the element of eligibility for citizenship is not having a statutory prohibition. Thus the real issue is whether there is a criminal record for the individual in that country.

In particular, IRCC can require applicants to submit police certificates from any country the individual visited even if briefly.

But as a standard practice, as part of the application itself:
-- for citizenship any applicant who spent a cumulative six months total, over the course of the relevant four years, is required to disclose this and submit a police certificate for that country
-- for Express Entry or spouse sponsored PR applications, the requirement to include a police certificate is triggered for any country in which the applicant lived for six months or more

But again, IRCC can nonetheless otherwise request applicants to submit police certificates even if the individual was in the respective country less than that amount of time.

Do you think applicants from 'iffy' countries (which they travel to regularly) should include a police certificate with their application as a precaution even if they haven't racked up 6 cumulative months in their country of origin? Or is that a bad idea...maybe it tells the officer that you didn't understand or read the rules?

 

[dpenabill]

Do you think applicants from 'iffy' countries (which they travel to regularly) should include a police certificate with their application as a precaution even if they haven't racked up 6 cumulative months in their country of origin? Or is that a bad idea...maybe it tells the officer that you didn't understand or read the rules?

Mostly follow the instructions. If in doubt, follow the instructions, and otherwise, yep, follow the instructions.

Sure, there are occasions in which a particular individual has good reason for doing something a little differently. I have done this myself. But as a general proposition, the best course to take is usually to stick to following the instructions. If there is a very good reason, and the individual is very sure of both that reason and the potential collateral consequences, then as I have, based on that individual's best, carefully considered judgment, OK.

Usually there is no advantage to submitting more than is requested.

As I have mentioned above (or recently in another topic), so far I have not seen any applicant not required (per the six months cumulative presence rule) to submit a police certificate be requested to submit one.

All that said: I should make it clear that I am no expert and I definitely am not qualified to give personal advice.

I have become familiar with several aspects of citizenship and PR issues, but am quite unacquainted with many other aspects. I share what I know about the statutory, regulatory, policy, and practice elements, but most of that is readily accessible by anyone who does the homework. And things are always subject to change.

In any event, there is a lot I do not know. And in particular I am not qualified to give personal advice, and thus I make a concerted effort to keep any recommendations limited to the more settled and obvious ones. Like do not apply until you meet the qualifications. The easy ones.

 

[anon3721]

I submitted my application with FBI police certificate, and it's still sitting in CPC-S Sydney. Worse yet, I still need to submit another police certificate, but that country will not issue me one unless CIC officially asks for it ("The official letter requesting a police certificate from Citizenship and Immigration Canada").

Took me four months to get the FBI, so by the time my application arrived at CIC it's already 1.5 months old.

Just so you are aware. I am also kind of convinced this makes you "non-routine", because people have been going from AOR to IP in days. For me it's been four months now...

 

[dpenabill]

I submitted my application with FBI police certificate, and it's still sitting in CPC-S Sydney. Worse yet, I still need to submit another police certificate, but that country will not issue me one unless CIC officially asks for it ("The official letter requesting a police certificate from Citizenship and Immigration Canada").

Took me four months to get the FBI, so by the time my application arrived at CIC it's already 1.5 months old.

Just so you are aware. I am also kind of convinced this makes you "non-routine", because people have been going from AOR to IP in days. For me it's been four months now...

I tend to agree that presence abroad in a country totaling six months or more in the relevant four years is quite likely something which either triggers a non-routine process or elevates the risk. It is apparent, for example, that when that amount of time abroad is identified, IRCC will do an independent criminal background check, of some sort, for that country. I do not know what that entails, how that is in fact done. Whether it is coordinated through IRCC's visa offices or through other avenues of cooperation between governments.

Obviously which country is involved can make a huge difference. IRCC already has access to and checks the U.S. NCIC (which has same name records as FBI) and INTERPOL, in addition to RCMP name records. And many countries have far more cooperative agreements than some. Indeed, I suspect some are rather uncooperative. Moreover the quality and reliability of records in some countries are less than optimal, and for such countries I wonder if there is a bit more effort to screen via alternative resources. Hard to know what IRCC does or will do since this area is strictly confidential, very little of the policy or practice divulged to the public.

I would strongly suggest, however, not fudging about this in the least. Declaring just five and a half months in a country in the presence calculator and not declaring it as a place one was for six months is not worth doing if a person really was in that country a total of 183 days or more, no matter how easy it is to allocate some of those days as if in another country.

 

[anon3721]

I tend to agree that presence abroad in a country totaling six months or more in the relevant four years is quite likely something which either triggers a non-routine process or elevates the risk. It is apparent, for example, that when that amount of time abroad is identified, IRCC will do an independent criminal background check, of some sort, for that country. I do not know what that entails, how that is in fact done. Whether it is coordinated through IRCC's visa offices or through other avenues of cooperation between governments.

Obviously which country is involved can make a huge difference. IRCC already has access to and checks the U.S. NCIC (which has same name records as FBI) and INTERPOL, in addition to RCMP name records. And many countries have far more cooperative agreements than some. Indeed, I suspect some are rather uncooperative. Moreover the quality and reliability of records in some countries are less than optimal, and for such countries I wonder if there is a bit more effort to screen via alternative resources. Hard to know what IRCC does or will do since this area is strictly confidential, very little of the policy or practice divulged to the public.

I would strongly suggest, however, not fudging about this in the least. Declaring just five and a half months in a country in the presence calculator and not declaring it as a place one was for six months is not worth doing if a person really was in that country a total of 183 days or more, no matter how easy it is to allocate some of those days as if in another country.

Thanks for your input dpenabill. This really sheds some light for me, as I was increasingly becoming anxious at the fact that my file is just sitting in Sydney while everyone else's fly past.

So if presence abroad in a country for 6+ months is higher risk, and I have been abroad for 6+ months in TWO countries, I'm 99% sure at this point that it's a non-routine case. Do you happen to know what the current processing time for non-routine is? CIC does not even say that now. Used to say 36 months or something...