Middle East applicants |
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Author | |
CanadaCitizen
Junior Member Joined: 19 Oct 2014 Status: Offline Points: 21 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Posted: 19 Oct 2014 at 11:57pm |
Hello, I worked previously in the Middle East. I have a non-cancelled visa, which I didnt bother getting cancelled when I left. What is the probabily of me getting an RQ. Is it common for applicants with a ME background to get RQ. How many did get RQ?
|
|
TD123
Junior Member Joined: 22 Jul 2012 Location: Toronto Status: Offline Points: 100 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
I had worked in UAE before immigrating to Canada. My residence visa was cancelled but I still got the RQ. During the interview/test, the officer asked me if I was still working in UAE... i showed her that the visa was cancelled many years ago, but she didn't seem to be convinced
|
|
St. Clair
Applied: Aug 2011 Started: March 2012 Test/Interview/RQ: July 2012 RQ submitted: Aug/Sep 2012 File xfered to Scarborough for Oath: 11 Aug 2014 Oath: 25 Nov 2014 |
|
CanadaCitizen
Junior Member Joined: 19 Oct 2014 Status: Offline Points: 21 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Hi,
is this case particular with only UAE or all GCC countries. When did you land, when did you apply for citizenship and how many years are you still on RQ? Edited by CanadaCitizen - 20 Oct 2014 at 12:52pm |
|
TD123
Junior Member Joined: 22 Jul 2012 Location: Toronto Status: Offline Points: 100 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
Its common for all GCC countries. See my signature below for the timeline. Even if u get a new passport, you MUST take all the previously expired passports for the interview. There is no way out.
|
|
St. Clair
Applied: Aug 2011 Started: March 2012 Test/Interview/RQ: July 2012 RQ submitted: Aug/Sep 2012 File xfered to Scarborough for Oath: 11 Aug 2014 Oath: 25 Nov 2014 |
|
TD123
Junior Member Joined: 22 Jul 2012 Location: Toronto Status: Offline Points: 100 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
In your case, there is a very high possibility of getting the RQ as your visa wasn't cancelled.
|
|
St. Clair
Applied: Aug 2011 Started: March 2012 Test/Interview/RQ: July 2012 RQ submitted: Aug/Sep 2012 File xfered to Scarborough for Oath: 11 Aug 2014 Oath: 25 Nov 2014 |
|
CanadaCitizen
Junior Member Joined: 19 Oct 2014 Status: Offline Points: 21 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
ok
Edited by CanadaCitizen - 20 Oct 2014 at 12:52pm |
|
dpenabill
Top Member Joined: 29 Nov 2009 Status: Offline Points: 6407 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
For several years, at minimum, forums like this have been rife with comments about a ME bias at CIC, particularly as to citizenship applications. There may very well be a statistically higher rate of RQ (or other elevated scrutiny) for applicants with a ME connection, but it is not as if a majority are given RQ. And I doubt the higher rate of RQ, assuming there is one, is due to bias, but is due to circumstances which are more common among ME connected applicants. As your query alludes, it should be emphasized, particular details matter, like having continuing status to live and work in the ME, and as otherwise suggested, what the particular connection is and to which country in particular. Moreover, other personal factors, again the details, matter. One might notice, for example, the high percentage of cases reported, this past year in official decisions by the Federal Court, involving applicants with a Lebanon connection; the connection that probably mattered, however, was probably not so much their connection to Lebanon itself, but their connection to a particular consultant who happened to have a lot of clients with connections to Lebanon, a consultant who came under elevated scrutiny and whose clients then, in turn, came under elevated scrutiny. There is probably no on/off switch regarding the non-cancelled visa, but it is, again probably, a factor, one which is weighed relative to other details in your facts, your circumstances, including your travel history. As TD123 suggests, with such a visa CIC will want to see, and will take a close look at, ALL travel documents which could be relevant in any way. If CIC gets the impression there is a travel document the applicant is not disclosing, the scrutiny and skepticism elevate. But many applicants with a ME connection sail through the process easily as well. IT DEPENDS. In any event, all applicants should be prepared for the possibility of RQ. Sure, some of us have reason to apprehend a much higher risk for RQ, and we prepare accordingly . . . for me, in fact, I delayed applying for well over a year beyond the date I passed the 1095 days of APP threshold to be in a better position for RQ (I was not an applicant with a ME connection however; it was other factors that loomed ominously in my case). Most applicants do not run into problems. Yes, a visa in a passport representing status to live and work in a country other than Canada suggests, to a stranger-bureaucrat assessing the case, there is a significant likelihood the individual lived and worked in that other country . . . which can lead to RQ and increased scrutiny of residency documentation. If you were actually living and working in Canada, and have reasonable documentation to show where you were living, where you were working, and your facts add up, are consistent and coherent and make sense, there should be little or nothing to worry about. There is no guarantee you will not get RQ, anyone can get RQ, but overall there should be no problem. (Note: there are many 2011 and 2012 applicants who can report a different experience; their experience is not representative of what 2013 and more recent applicants are experiencing.) |
|
Bureaucracy is what bureaucracy does, or When in doubt, follow the instructions. Otherwise, follow the instructions.
BTW: Not an expert, not a Can. lawyer, never worked in immigration |
|
ski
Moderator Group Forum Moderator Joined: 14 Aug 2012 Status: Offline Points: 564 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
The United States officially ties its visa exemption policy to the ratio of visa denials.
This led to interesting situations like Slovenia becoming a visa-exempt country while not yet being an E. U. member, while Greece still required visas for the U. S. being a E. U. member at the same time. If a particular country statistically provides a higher number of doubtful cases, then I think the government has every reason to reallocate their "scrutiny" and resources to applicants from such countries - simply because this way you will identify more fraudsters per one dollar of your budget spending. I think that most or all complaints that a particular country or region is mistreated are simply speculations. How would the persons who complain even know about the situation with applicants from other regions? Naturally they will have a relatively high number of acquaintances from their region of origin, they will hear about more problematic cases and they may assume that their country or region of origin is discriminated. Anyone familiar with mathematical statistics would agree that such a small and biased sample cannot produce any meaningful results. With that said, even if it is true and a particular country or a group of countries is profiled, the applicants from there should not be blaming CIC. They should rather blame their fellow nationals who produce the high fraud statistics leading to an appropriate response from the government authorities, and make sure that their cases are bulletproof.
Edited by ski - 21 Oct 2014 at 2:23am |
|
idlemind
Junior Member Joined: 10 Aug 2012 Status: Offline Points: 17 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
But isn`t
that the very definition of bias, preconcieved conclusions based on your
association with a particular group rather than your individual
characteristics. If visible minorities are disproportionately represented in
crime statistics, should we then dedicate more resources to policing visible
minorities because they are more likely to commit a crime? Better bang for your
buck? What if a particular group, say first nations, are less likely finish
school than others, then to get more graduates per dollar spent, may be we should
stop giving them admission. Just
because some of my compatriots have committed fraud, it is not justified to
deny me mobility and voting rights for two additional years (assuming that an
application without RQ would have taken 1 year). This government's policies are
unabashedly populist and they have made immigrants out to be the boogey man.
The changes to citizenship made by this government have in fact weakened
citizenship and made all immigrants more vulnerable. Thank you CONS! |
|
Mark1552
Junior Member Joined: 09 Jun 2014 Status: Offline Points: 21 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
idlemind, but if you ignore risk factors then you risk falling into the politically correct trap of having to question 90 year old ladies to see it they have committed violent street crime just to ensure you don't only question young men.
CIC need to spend their time and resources (RQ's) on applications that statistically have the highest chance of containing errors or being fraudulent. Political correctness should play no part in the immigration system.
|
|
Post Reply | Page 12> |
Tweet |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |