Long Delay in Citizenship Processing

In a recent article,  Metro News  http://metronews.ca/news/canada/1249955/new-canadian-questions-reasons-for-long-delay-in-getting-citizenship/, questions the reasons for the long delay in citizenship applications.

We know the answer.

The answer is found (in large part) in an Operational Bulletin  which was released by Citizenship and Immigration  in May, 2012. Operational Bulletin  407, directs CIC to send out a second  Residency  Questionnaires to persons applying for Citizenship and to request more supporting documents to substantiate the claimed periods of residency in Canada.  This bulletin can now be found on the internet, http://residencequestionnaire.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/atip-op407.pdf , but it was not posted for public viewing on the CIC website. This Residency Questionnaire was sent out to so many applicants, that it inevitably slowed down the overall processing of the applications since that time, and created a backlog of cases.  In addition, there were many investigations, not only in regard to citizenship requirements but also in many cases, to whether the people applying for citizenship met their Permanent Resident residency requirements.

Clearly, going forward, with the many upcoming Citizenship changes, which we will discuss in our future blogs,  we can say that residency questionnaires and investigations into applicants permanent residency requirements, foreshadowed the reality of how Citizenship applications will be treated and processed under the new Citizenship law. It should be of great concern to those who are thinking of applying for citizenship. 

The only thing that we can say is that if you are thinking of applying for citizenship you should apply now before the new law comes in effect at the end of May, 2015, because it will not get better, or least it does not appear to be so.

POLYGAMOUS AND FORCED MARRIAGES

We have moved to our new offices at Hullmark Centre,  4773 Yonge Street, Suite 3F, at the south-east corner of Yonge and Sheppard. With priority to a particularly heavy case load for the past month,  and planning and executing our move, we unfortunately could not devote adequate time to some of our other functions. Posting blogs was one of them. Now that we have settled in, we will make a conscientious effort to post our blogs about the many developments in immigration law and policy on a regular basis.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/chris-alexander-to-ban-immigrants-in-polygamous-forced-marriages-1.2824320

The announcement of changes to ban “immigrant in polygamous, forced marriages” seems to be little more than an election-time promise.  It has to be because the idea seems unnecessary and redundant, as the Act and Regulations already preclude spousal sponsorships by Canadian citizens and Permanent Residents who have more than one spouse at the time. R. 5 (b)(i) of the IRPR reads:

5. Excluded relationships -  For the purposes of these Regulations, a foreign national shall not be considered

 (b) the spouse of a person if

(i) the foreign national or the person was, at the time of their marriage, the spouse of another person, or …

Thus, the provision related to polygamy is "no news";  the Minister already has tools at his disposal to  deal with the issue.

The issues of  "honour killings" and "forced marriages" which  the above newspaper article discusses, is something else.  First of all, under the Criminal Code of Canada killing of any sort is murder for which punishment is already prescribed by the Criminal Code. So there is nothing new here either.

The question of "forced marriages", however, is new, and it will be interesting to see how the proposed legislation defines it and, better still, what methodology it will develop to identify such cases. Will it be limited solely to polygamous marriages or will it be "forced marriages" in general. Dare we contemplate the number of people worldwide who have been coerced , one way or another,  into a marriage "not out of love"!

However, the real issue, obscured by all this bureaucratic hoopla, is the fact that many people in non-polygamous marriages get caught up in this  problem, those from Islamic countries in particular, because they have separated and are in the process of divorcing their spouse, when they marry their new wife. Because the divorce is not finalized at the time of the new marriage, Immigration Canada refuses their application to sponsor their new spouse, based on 5 (b)(i) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations.

Anchor Babies

The following article illustrates another example where the current government raises fear over a non-problem to change the very nature of Canadian citizenship.

 http://www.thestar.com/news/immigration/2014/08/18/ottawa_urged_to_remove_citizenship_by_birth_on_canadian_soil.html

The proposal seems to be yet another example of poorly conceptualized policy and law changes, without adequately thinking through the possible consequences they may occasion if implemented.

 

In this case, the "field" appears to have a firmer grip on reality than the "think-tanks" at the National Headquarters. The CBSA is correctly warning the government that these changes will end up costing the Canadian taxpayers disproportionately to the benefits they may realize, while creating operational nightmares. The Government and its “legal beagles”, however, set on their preconceived course,  appear to be deaf to these alarm bells.

 

The whole endeavor seems to be predicated on the irrational obsession with the guarding and protecting of Canadian citizenship. We are constantly reminded by the bureaucrats that "citizenship is a precious privilege" and that the abuse of "Canada's generosity" must be terminated. While one is hard-pressed to put forth convincing arguments against such noble intents, the fact is that this is all based on presumptions, presuppositions and "urban anecdotes". The sad truth is that no government agency keeps statistics on live births to non-status parents in Canada, how many of these babies accompany their parents if the parents are removed or otherwise leave Canada, nor how many of them return in adulthood to sponsor their parents and bring them to Canada. And given the moratorium on the sponsorship of parents, which has practically wiped out that entire class of immigrants, does it really  matter?

 

Canada has signed international conventions that commit us not to make people stateless. Canada is a signatory to the 1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Yet, the current government is apparently prepared to turn a blind eye and abrogate all those commitments. It finds justification for its intent in the fact that currently only Canada and the United States offer "birth on soil" ("anchor babies" is a disparaging terminology common in the United States) provisions, as if that in itself has no  intrinsic values which sets us apart from the rest of the world.

 

Let us look at an example. Palestinians, who for generations have been moving from country to country never acquire citizenship of any state. Under the proposed changes, children of Palestinians seeking protection  in Canada, would be born in Canada but would not have Canadian citizenship. Then, if the claim of their parents fails, there would be no government to give these babies citizenship and travel documents, hence making it impossible for them to accompany their families if the parents are required to leave Canada and return to the country they came from. Canada, in that scenario, would in fact be engaging in the breaking up of families and making these children a ward of the state.

 

This could also happen to a family that is here on temporary purposes, with no intention of immigrating to Canada, or seeking protection.

 

Losing Canadian Citizenship and Permanent Residence

As if to confirm our last blog posting, the Federal Court recently not only allowed the removal of Canadian citizenship from a family, but also imposed $63, 000 of costs on them. Costs which are very high in Citizenship and Immigration litigation.

 

http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/07/28/blatantly-lying-loses-family-its-citizenship-but-earns-them-a-63k-bill-from-canadian-government/

 

This article illustrates the reality that our warnings are not us “crying wolf” but a true reflection of today’s reality when it comes to Canadian Citizenship and Permanent Residence. The final piece of advice, while seemingly self-serving, is as true. It is wise when dealing with such matters to seek the assistance not only of experienced litigators but of litigators experienced in Citizenship and Immigration matters, and the Federal Court, because such litigation is highly specialized and unique.

 

For those interested this is link to the actual decision of the Federal Court,

 

http://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/70932/index.do?r=AAAAAQAISG9jaGFpbWUAAAAAAQ

 

Finally, a warning to many clients who have been misled by  so called “professionals” .  Lets just say that maintaining status and citizenship in Canada, is no longer “easy” as you were made to believe, and if you wish to remain Canadian Permanent Residents and Canadian Citizens you better take proactive steps to protect your status. We also believe that criminal prosecutions in certain cases will be a growing reality.

Detentions & Deportations

Recent articles dealing with different subjects, one on deportation of a long-time Canadian and the other about detention, reflect the new reality of Canadian immigration; the focus is no longer on attracting people to Canada, but rather, on kicking people out.

http://www.truenorthtimes.ca/2014/06/16/government-deporting-man-whose-citizenship-revoked-media-grants-sainthood/

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/local-news/they-march-in-ottawa-to-push-for-end-to-immigration-detention

Few are safe from this trend. As can be seen from the deportation story, even people who have been citizens for decades are not exempt from losing their citizenship, and facing deportation.

Permanent Residents should be aware that they are most vulnerable to this problem when they are applying for citizenship, as the government is checking carefully not only that you meet the residency requirements for citizenship, but also going back to check for other problems of possible misrepresentation (for example failing to declare a spouse at the time of landing).

The government is also evaluating other inadmissibility criteria including examining whether individuals have met the residency requirement for maintaining one’s PR status. In fact, it seems that the government  is deliberately delaying processing of citizenship applications across the country, not only to ensure that persons have maintained the Permanent Residency requirement prior to applying for citizenship, but also ensuring that they have stayed in Canada and maintained their residency requirements after they applied for citizenship. That is, if you applied in 2012, and the application is not processed until 2014, the government may check whether you have been out of the country since 2012, and may look as far back as five years prior to your date of application, in this case, looking to 2009, if during that time period, you have been out of the Canada.

As for detention, it is becoming a reality for an increasing number of people, including tourists.  It is not only alarming  that tourists who happen to be confused at the port of entry and do not answer questions to the satisfaction of the very aggressive CBSA are increasingly  being detained, but even more alarming is the length of time for which they are being detained. They are often being detained for  a month or more without being allowed out on bond and then deported back.  Even when released, their bonds are often astronomical compared to what you see in criminal cases. In these detention cases, bonds are often in the tens of thousands of dollars. The new reality of Canadian immigration is casting an increasingly wider net and legitimate applicants, even Canadians, may risk being caught up in it. 

Visitor's Visas

 An article in the Saint John’s The Telegram,

  http://www.thetelegram.com/News/Local/2014-04-02/article-3674316/Immigration-Canada-cites-lack-of-money-and-experience-for-denying-visa/1

expressed outrage when Canada Immigration refused a visa, and explained as follows:

“In reviewing her application, the visa officer noted that Ms. Alawiran-Plaza did not provide evidence that she has given similar talks or presentations in the past and she has no previous documented travel outside of the Philippines,” an email from Immigration Canada reads. “In addition, she has negligible savings and few ties to her home country. Although her trip was being funded by the organization, the visa officer was not satisfied that she had enough money to support herself during her stay in Canada, and was not satisfied that she would leave Canada at the end of her visit. As such, the officer refused her application for a temporary resident visa.”

To be honest, there is nothing surprising about this. Yes, it is unreasonable in light of the fact that the visitor was being invited by a Catholic organization but this is a very standard refusal.  It is frustrating because dealing with refused cases from all over the world we see this standard language often which does not really disclose what the issues are. Furthermore, the decisions made when processing applications for visitor visas (temporary resident applications) are highly discretionary.  However, we would state that in cases such as this, where an applicant does not have a travel history or significant savings when applying for a visitor visa, it would be important to counterweigh this by delineating both the applicant's credentials and the credibility of the inviting party. Credibility is always an underlying issue. If the purpose of the visit is credible, if you, the applicant, is credible, if the person and/or organization that is doing the inviting is credible, the chances of obtaining the visa will be better.

Lee & Company

Interview with Albilad Newspaper

 

49  Issue 147 April 2014

Immigration Consultant Mohamed Abuzayed joins »Lee & Company« for Immigration Services

 

Abuzayed: I joined the Company because of its success and good reputation

IMMIGRATION CONSULTATION IS NEEDED IN LONDON, AS THE SYSTEM FACES MANY CHANGES

 

HAVING A TRUSTED CONSULTANT HELPS IN FULFILLMENT OF YOUR GOALS

 

”Lee  &  Company“  for  immigration services recently opened a new branch in    London,    Ontario.    This    branch is   administered by   the   immigration consultant Mohamed Abuzayed to serving mainly the Arabic Community.  The company used to receive calls from London, but did not open the office till they found a trusted person.  Albilad visited  the  Company  office and  talked  to  the  office manager  Mr. Abuzayed and the principal consultant of  the company Mr. Marko Vitorovich.

 

About the  services offered  by  the

Company Mr. Abuzayed said:

”The law firm was formed circa 2001, with a  special  focus  on  immigration  litigation and  refugee  appeals,  I  heard  about  their growing reputation and success in the field and I joined recently, as they are looking to establish a network to help people across the country with immigration issues.

“ Mr. Abuzayed explains that he recognized that  these  specialized  services  were  not just a growing reality of immigration law, but a particular growing need for the Arab community,   in   London,   where   Arabic permanent   residents   when   applying   for extensions of their statuses or applying for citizenships are routinely investigated and prosecuted for allegedly failing to comply with their residency obligations.  To better serve the Arabic community in London, Lee & Company moved to open a branch office in London, managed by Mr. Abuzayed.

The firm recognized the need for their legal expertise in the Arabic community, and the large Arabic community in London, as they would get requests from clients in London to assist them, however, they did not want to  open  an  office until  they  could  find a person of trust. Once that person of trust was found, Mr. Abuzayed, they moved to open an office“.

 

Mr. Marko Vitorovich, the Principal Consultant  of  the  firm, explained the firm services:

"The   need   for   our   type   of   services, what  we  call  litigation,  which  consists of  refused  cases,  inadmissibility  issues, spousal   appeals,   deportations,   refugee appeals,   detention   reviews,   and   such cases, is unfortunately a growing reality of immigration changes“.

He noted that immigrant communities are facing this new reality and many need help to  navigate  this  new  world  of  Canadian immigration. He notes further that while the government boasts about the high level of immigration, most immigrant communities are well aware of a very different reality.

He added: ”This trend started years ago, when Ms. Lee and I,   first started talking about it and realizing the old days and old ways of practicing immigration law would be drastically changed, and you need hard core legal skills, a deep knowledge of the law,  great  advocacy  skills,  both  written and oral, a litigation approach, which does not mean that you are always adversarial, but  rather  that  you  prepare  and  present your case, as if you are facing the toughest judge, that the days of simply filling forms in even the simplest of cases was long over. These days even an honest mistake on the form could lead to a refusal.  This has been increasingly the reality and more so today than when we started 15 years ago.“

 

Ms. Lee the Principal of the Firm states:

”Enforcement is increasingly the name of the game“. She explains how it has come to light that the government has set a target of 875 cases per year to strip persons granted refugee  protection  of  their  status  through vacation or cessation proceedings. She continues - ”We are currently handling such cases, and in one case, the person has been found to be a refugee some 14 years ago, and for most of those 14 years the person has been a permanent resident.“ Ms. Lee adds, that persons who  have become permanent residents after given refugee protection, can be removed years later through no fault of their own but simply because the situation in their country has changed.

They add that the proposed changes to the citizenship laws, in some ways, at least in part, is targeted at the Arabic community, and it is also codification of something that has  been  a  reality  for  some  time.    They explain that because of what the government perceived as a high level of fraud in both applications for renewal of PR status, and applications for citizenships, particularly for those working in the Middle East and abroad, the  government  has  for  the  past  several years scrutinized both PR and Citizenship applications very carefully.

 

Mr. Abuzayed explains – ”In the past you  could  simply  fill forms  and  provide minimal info and obtain a new PR card or even become a citizen, our community in London, knows this is no longer the reality“. Mr. Abuzayed added that the new changes to the citizenship laws, will impact the Arabic community,   as the government introduces changes to make it more difficult to obtain citizenship, and for some time now even a renewal of a PR card application is subject to more scrutiny. Again, in the past, permanent residents were able to stay in Canada for 3 years, apply for citizenship and then leave. When  the  processing  of  the  citizenship application was complete they would come back to complete the citizenship application and collect their cards.   That is no longer the case anymore, as for several years now, citizenship applications are delayed, taking several years to process, while immigration investigate whether the applicant  continues to maintain their  PR residency obligations and    the    possible    granting/refusing    of citizenship.

They also explain that they are seeing an increase in investigations against permanent residents and even citizens across the board, in the Chinese and Indian communities they are seeing many investigations of permanent residence,  particularly  when  applying  for citizenship, of people who landed on spousal sponsorships.

 

Mr. Vitorovich continues:

”even here, sometimes the person has been a permanent resident for almost a decade, and they have what appear to be very minimal reason to suspect the marriage that brought the PR to Canada was one of convenience, and yet they pursue them“. Alarmingly, even citizens are not saved“.

Ms. Lee explains:

”In  the  past  if  you  are  a  citizen,  unless you  are,  for  example  a war  criminal  when  you obtained         citizenship and you lied about it, it was  almost  unheard  of that  they  would  try  to remove  your  citizenship, however,  from  what  we see going forward, if there is  misrepresentation  not only on  your  citizenship application,  but  related on  how  you  became  a permanent  resident,  they will   consider   trying   to remove your citizenship.“

 

Mr. Vitorovich adds:

”However as tough as the new reality is, the truth is that  there  are  remedies, there are solutions, to all of these issues, it is just that   they   involve   time, preparation,    effort    and knowledge. People know that Canada seems to be closing category after category of immigration“.

 

Ms. Lee continues:

"What is most troubling is that the government feels free to apply laws retroactively, first Federal Skilled Workers who have been waiting patiently in line for years, are told they are being eliminated to clear up the backlog, their dreams of immigrating to Canada are over, now it’s the investors turn. No matter how you spin it, this is terribly unfair. Imagine how you would feel if it was your family in this line up that is eliminated by retroactive legislation."
Many    top    immigration    law    firms in  the  country  have  challenged  the government’s  decision  to  cancel the FSW  category  and  the  cases  are  still before the Court.

Ms.  Lee  continues:  ”We  are  in  the forefront of challenging this retroactive legislation, one of the lead cases in the Federal Skilled Worker litigation is ours, and  for  the  investor  category,  we  are presently representing some 50 investors and we will be challenging the investor retroactivity, as well. We will take this issue as far as it can go, because we see it as a question of the Rule of Law, an issue  that  strikes  at  the  heart  of  core Canadian legal values.“

 

Mr. Abazuyed pointed out, ”Although the rules have changed and immigration is getting tougher, you should not lose hope.   It is important to keep in mind the   importance  of  hiring  trustworthy and diligent counsel to help you achieve your  immigration  goals.     Nowadays, most  processing  applications  involve having an employer waiting for you; this is key and true for both provincial and federal programs“.

 

To view the paper online:
http://www.albilad.net/pdf/i147.pdf
http://www.albilad.net/