iaink

What, even if you cheated to get it? You bloody well shouldnt be able to relax if thats the case.

Alan2005

They can take it away if you obtained it illegally. What's wrong with that?

If you steal a TV and get caught a few months later, they don't say "well, you've had it a while, you might as well keep it"

JonboyE

I believe that one of the main reasons citizenship is revoked is that people do not fulfill the three years out of four requirement prior to applying.

The scenario is:

* Land in Canada.
* Arrange for a mailing address and someone to monitor your mail.
* B*gg*r off back to your country of origin (or elsewhere).
* Maintain a fiction that you are in Canada with this mailing address.
* Once citizenship is granted keep your Canadian passport in your back pocket and expect the Canadian government to come to your rescue if it all goes **** up where you are living.

The thing that gave the game away was that hundreds of PRs reported the same mailing address as their residence in Canada. It turned out to be the home of an immigration consultant.

I don't have a problem with citizenship being revoked if it was obtained fraudulently.

CanadaJimmy

Well no, that IS wrong. I was thinking in terms of the government getting something wrong, thinking that you cheated when you didn't and then all of a sudden your passports being whisked away. Look at all the mistakes CIC makes with PR applications, thinking they've not got documents when they were clearly sent with the application and things like that. With citizenship most people think they're past all that nonsense but apparently that's not the case.

It's just better for everyone involved if they do more thorough checking beforehand then close the case. There ARE going to be exceptions but 1800 is astonishingly high.

ExKiwilass

I don't understand why you would be concerned about this. It's in pretty clear cases of fraud that they would revoke cit'ship - quite right too imo. Bring it!

Steve_

In the UK under the Immigration Act 2006 your citizenship can be revoked without a hearing if there is a compelling reason to do so as determined by the Secretary of State, even if citizenship was obtained legally, in fact even if you were born in the UK, the only restriction is that removing your citizenship doesn't leave you stateless.

This is the power that was used to strip Anna Chapman of her citizenship.

Alan2005

Governments get something wrong all the time. Yeah, it would be better to find this out at the start, but there is always fraud and limited resources so nothing is 100%. I assume these 1800 are going to have due process applied and will get their day in court should they have evidence to prove that they in fact aren't dodgy.

Steve_

Did you see that bit on 60 minutes about that Lebanese-born woman who was a CIA spy and obtained US citizenship fraudulently?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/...n6335794.shtml

The most relevant bit is the fourth to last paragraph:



So basically she is screwed without an Act of Congress, even a Presidential pardon wouldn't help, because once the citizenship is gone, it's gone, even if you get a pardon for the fraud.

Auld Yin

There was a commentator on CBC News this morning suggesting that it's thought not too many of the 1800 would challenge the removal of their citizenship, the belief being that the Government is in possession of good evidence of the fraud. Many of the fraudsters already live abroad and wouldn't return for the challenge.

MarylandNed

It will never happen but not because it's far too sensible. In fact, legally, it doesn't make any sense at all. Once you're a citizen, you're as much a citizen as someone who was born in Canada. We don't have different categories of Canadian citizenship (just different ways to obtain it).

If the citizenship was obtained fraudulently (e.g. not disclosing crimes that were committed prior to obtaining citizenship) then it should be revoked. But committing crimes after citizenship is obtained cannot be grounds for losing citizenship.

macadian

Read my post again...I know that my suggestion is not the case legally or otherwise....thought that was obvious? It was simply me making an observation...and from my own point of view, something that might be worth considering....you don't agree? Fine. Do try and keep up.....

Have a nice day!

MarylandNed

I read your post but I'm not a mind reader. You didn't mention the legal angle and therefore it wasn't obvious that you knew you were talking nonsense. All you said was that it wouldn't happen because it was "far too sensible". It'll never happen because it's legally unenforcable and, if anyone was ever stupid enough to try it, it wouldn't survive the first legal challenge. You can't start making decisions to strip someone of their citizenship based solely on the route they took to get that citizenship (e.g. by birth, by descent, by naturalization). Of course, fraudulent naturalization applications should certainly be looked at and dealt with but if the application was not fraudulent that person remains a Canadian citizen regardless of what they do afterwards.

iaink

Maybe three years as a PR before becoming a citizen is not a long enough "probationary period"?

Personally I was surprised it was so relatively easy to become a Canadian.

MarylandNed

Actually you don't even need to be a PR for 3 years. You can be a PR for 2 years and still apply for citizenship as long as you also have enough legal non-PR time in Canada before that (e.g. work permit).

In Australia you can apply for citizenship after as little as 1 year as a PR but, again, you also need enough legal non-PR time in the country before that.

iaink

You know what I mean though, it just doesnt seem like a whole lot of time.