Process to revoke Canadian citizenship

This section contains policy, procedures and guidance used by IRCC staff. It is posted on the department’s website as a courtesy to stakeholders.

The Case Management Branch (CMB) processes cases where an individual’s citizenship is being considered for revocation on the grounds of false representation, fraud or knowingly concealing material circumstances. Domestic and Centralized Network staff are typically not involved with these types of cases, other than to alert CMB should information come to their attention regarding a case that could be investigated for possible revocation.

On this page

The initial revocation investigation

If IRCC suspects false representation, fraud or knowingly concealing material circumstances (or if a tip is provided to the department), IRCC’s Compliance Inspections and Investigations Division (CIID) gathers and collates relevant information on potential revocation of citizenship cases, including cases linked to large-scale investigations conducted by the department or related criminal investigations conducted by enforcement partners such as the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) or the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA).

In instances where a case may involve an allegation of security, human or international rights violations, or organized criminality, the file is referred to the Security and Exceptional Cases Division (SECD) for further assessment.

The Citizenship and Passport Cases Division (CPCD) will review the file provided by CIID and SECD to determine whether revocation proceedings should be commenced or whether the file should be closed. If the CPCD determines the case should move forward, the issuance of a non-statutory request for information letter is initiated by the CPCD.

Request for information letter

The non-statutory request for information letter is issued to the individual to notify them that IRCC has information indicating that they may have obtained their Canadian citizenship by false representation, fraud or knowingly concealing material circumstances and is considering formally commencing revocation proceedings. The letter gives the individual the opportunity to respond with written submissions within 30 days of the date of the letter, including with respect to any personal circumstances warranting special relief.

Once submissions (if any) have been received in response to the request for information letter, the Minister’s delegate in CPCD will review and consider the submissions and will determine whether the potential revocation file will be closed or whether a notification letter will be issued to the individual.

Notification letter

The notification letter fulfills the requirement under subsection 10(3) of the Citizenship Act for the Minister to provide written notice to a person whose citizenship or renunciation of citizenship may be revoked. The notification letter formally initiates the revocation process.

The notification letter will do the following:

The notification letter will be accompanied by a form to be signed and returned by the individual if they wish to have the Minister act as the decision maker.

Personal circumstances

The Citizenship Act requires that the Minister consider any and all written representations made by the individual, including submissions pertaining to personal circumstances that warrant special relief from revocation and whether a decision to revoke citizenship will render the individual stateless.

When personal circumstances are considered, they must be assessed in light of all the circumstances of the case, which will include the public interest in revocation and the need to ensure citizenship program integrity. Each case must be considered on its own merit.

Both the request for information letter and the notification letter underline that personal circumstances may be brought to the attention of decision makers and that individuals are provided with the opportunity to make written representations. The onus is upon the individual to be clear as to exactly what personal circumstances should be considered. Individuals should put forth any factors that they believe are relevant to their revocation case, as well as any supporting documentation. Fact-finding should be done using the usual standard of proof in administrative law: the balance of probabilities.

If the individual makes personal circumstances representations in response to the letters and the Minister determines that special relief is not warranted, decision makers must be able to demonstrate that the personal circumstances were considered and explain why these circumstances did not warrant special relief.

Factors for consideration

In assessing personal circumstances, the Minister is not limited to consideration of the best interests of a child directly affected or whether the decision would render a person stateless.

As “personal circumstances” are not defined in the Citizenship Act, personal circumstances that may be considered include, but are not limited to,

Personal circumstances must be taken into consideration. Specific consideration should be given to the best interests of a child directly affected and whether revocation will result in statelessness.

Best interests of a child directly affected

The codification of the principle of “best interests of a child directly affected” into the legislation does not mean that special relief will always be warranted when revocation directly affects a child, regardless of all other factors in a case. While the best interests of a child directly affected must be considered, they are one of many important factors that the decision maker must consider in the context of a holistic assessment.

The best interests of a child directly affected may pertain to a Canadian or foreign-born child, in or outside of Canada. The best interests of a child must be considered when the child directly affected is under 18 years of age at the time of the revocation proceedings. There may also be cases in which the situation of older children is relevant and should be taken into consideration. The relationship between the individual subject to revocation proceedings and “a child directly affected” need not necessarily be that of parent and child, but could be another relationship whereby a child may be directly affected by the decision. For example, a grandparent could be the primary caregiver of a child who is directly affected by the decision.

As children may experience greater hardship than adults when faced with a comparable situation, circumstances that may not warrant relief when applied to an adult may nonetheless warrant relief in cases involving a child.

Generally, factors relating to a child’s emotional, social, cultural and physical welfare must be taken into consideration when raised, including, though not limited to,

Statelessness

Statelessness is one of many important factors that the decision maker must consider in the context of a holistic assessment. The codification into the legislation of the requirement to consider whether the decision will render an individual stateless does not mean that other factors in a case are not to be considered, or that relief from revocation will be warranted in all cases involving statelessness. Canada’s international obligations as a party to the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness do not prohibit Canada from revoking citizenship even if it would render a person stateless in the event that the individual obtained citizenship through misrepresentation or fraud.

Neither the Citizenship Act nor the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act explicitly defines statelessness. For clarity, a stateless person is a person who is not considered as a national by any state under the operation of its law.

Some factors for decision makers to consider when determining whether to allow for special relief in cases of statelessness include, but are not limited to,

Decision rendered by the Federal Court

The Federal Court is the decision maker for citizenship revocation cases, unless the person requests that the Minister act as the decision maker.

If the Federal Court is the decision maker, the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship commences an action before the Federal Court in order to obtain a declaration that the person has obtained, retained, renounced or resumed their citizenship by false representation, fraud or knowingly concealing material circumstances.

The Litigation Management Branch represents IRCC as the client and works with the Department of Justice and the Departmental Legal Services Unit to prepare and present the case for the Court.

If the Federal Court makes a declaration, the person’s citizenship is revoked, and they may only file an appeal with the Federal Court of Appeal if, in rendering its judgment, the Federal Court certifies that a serious question of general importance is involved and states the question.

If the Federal Court denies the declaration, the person’s citizenship is not revoked and they remain a citizen. However, the Minister may file an appeal of the Federal Court’s decision with the Federal Court of Appeal if a serious question of general importance is certified and stated by the Federal Court.

Decision rendered by the Minister

If the individual requests that the Minister make the decision on the revocation of their citizenship, the Minister will provide a decision in writing to the individual, in accordance with subsection 10(5) of the Citizenship Act. If the Minister renders a decision to revoke citizenship, the individual may file an application for leave and judicial review of the decision with the Federal Court, in accordance with section 22.1 of the Citizenship Act.

Page details

Date modified: