Getting into Canada DUI
08-23-2008, 09:31 PM
#22
New Hire
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Posts: 3
DUI Conviction
Under Canadian immigration law, a person who is not a Canadian citizen or permanent resident who has committed a criminal offence is generally considered to be "inadmissible" under Canadian law (i.e., the individual will not be permitted to enter Canada unless certain conditions are satisfied).
The rationale for this rule - which, by the way, is the same in the U.S. as it is in Canada - is that the government of a country has an obligation to protect its citizens from harm and to take reasonable steps to do so.
An individual who has committed a criminal offence and, as a result, has a criminal record is generally considered to have a higher likelihood of commiting a subsequent criminal offence than an individual who has no criminal record. It stands to reason, therefore, that the government authorities who are responsible for policing a country's international borders and ports of entry have an interest in preventing individuals with criminal records from entering the country.
Generally speaking, if an individual has committed or been convicted of a criminal offense the individual will not be permitted to enter Canada unless they obtain one of the following: (i) a Temporary Resident Permit (TRP), (ii) a finding of rehabilitation made by the Canadian immigration authorities.
A TRP is a special visitor visa which allows someone who is inadmissible to be admitted to enter Canada for a specified period of time. A finding of rehabilitation is a declaration by the Canadian immigration authorities that an individual with a criminal record has, as a result of the passage of time and by reason of good conduct, been deemed to have been "rehabilitated" so that the individual is now considered to be "admissible" (i.e., the individual will be permitted to enter Canada as a visitor).
Whether a person requires a TRP or a declaration of rehabilitation, depends on a variety of factors including, the type of criminal offense that the person was charged with, the outcome of the criminal proceedings, the period of time elapsed since conviction, whether the individual has been charged/convicted of other offenses, etc.
Both the Canadian and US immigration authorities have very strict rules relating to the admissibility of individuals with criminal records. Generally speaking, these rules are fairly consistent, however, there are differences in certain areas. For example, the Canadian immigration authorities are generally considered to be much stricter on individuals who have DUI convictions than their U. S. counterparts. On the other hand, the Canadian authorities tend to be more lenient than their U.S. counterparts on individuals who have prior convictions for possession of soft drugs.
These differences usually reflect the prevailing attitudes within each country to the particular types of conduct involved. Drinking and driving offenses are considered to be a form of highly "anti-social" behaviour in Canada, and convicted offenders are, at least by U.S. standards, treated quite harshly by the Canadian courts.
As a lawyer who practices Canadian immigration law, I am frequently consulted by U.S. nationals who, after many years of visiting Canada without any problems at the border, suddenly find that their names have been "red flagged" by Canadian immigration officers who now know of DUI charges or convictions which may have occured many years ago. This is happening because immigration authorities on both sides of the border are increasingly sharing information with one another about their respective citizens. This, in turn, has driven the development by public authorities on both sides of the border of improved background security checking systems at ports of entry. In the years to come, we can expect to see more refusals on both sides of the border as the databases which drive these systems grow and expand.
The rationale for this rule - which, by the way, is the same in the U.S. as it is in Canada - is that the government of a country has an obligation to protect its citizens from harm and to take reasonable steps to do so.
An individual who has committed a criminal offence and, as a result, has a criminal record is generally considered to have a higher likelihood of commiting a subsequent criminal offence than an individual who has no criminal record. It stands to reason, therefore, that the government authorities who are responsible for policing a country's international borders and ports of entry have an interest in preventing individuals with criminal records from entering the country.
Generally speaking, if an individual has committed or been convicted of a criminal offense the individual will not be permitted to enter Canada unless they obtain one of the following: (i) a Temporary Resident Permit (TRP), (ii) a finding of rehabilitation made by the Canadian immigration authorities.
A TRP is a special visitor visa which allows someone who is inadmissible to be admitted to enter Canada for a specified period of time. A finding of rehabilitation is a declaration by the Canadian immigration authorities that an individual with a criminal record has, as a result of the passage of time and by reason of good conduct, been deemed to have been "rehabilitated" so that the individual is now considered to be "admissible" (i.e., the individual will be permitted to enter Canada as a visitor).
Whether a person requires a TRP or a declaration of rehabilitation, depends on a variety of factors including, the type of criminal offense that the person was charged with, the outcome of the criminal proceedings, the period of time elapsed since conviction, whether the individual has been charged/convicted of other offenses, etc.
Both the Canadian and US immigration authorities have very strict rules relating to the admissibility of individuals with criminal records. Generally speaking, these rules are fairly consistent, however, there are differences in certain areas. For example, the Canadian immigration authorities are generally considered to be much stricter on individuals who have DUI convictions than their U. S. counterparts. On the other hand, the Canadian authorities tend to be more lenient than their U.S. counterparts on individuals who have prior convictions for possession of soft drugs.
These differences usually reflect the prevailing attitudes within each country to the particular types of conduct involved. Drinking and driving offenses are considered to be a form of highly "anti-social" behaviour in Canada, and convicted offenders are, at least by U.S. standards, treated quite harshly by the Canadian courts.
As a lawyer who practices Canadian immigration law, I am frequently consulted by U.S. nationals who, after many years of visiting Canada without any problems at the border, suddenly find that their names have been "red flagged" by Canadian immigration officers who now know of DUI charges or convictions which may have occured many years ago. This is happening because immigration authorities on both sides of the border are increasingly sharing information with one another about their respective citizens. This, in turn, has driven the development by public authorities on both sides of the border of improved background security checking systems at ports of entry. In the years to come, we can expect to see more refusals on both sides of the border as the databases which drive these systems grow and expand.
08-24-2008, 05:18 AM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 401
01-06-2012, 01:59 PM
#27
New Hire
Joined APC: Jan 2012
Posts: 1
We just got a big huge memo over at RAH about this...word on the street is now they're checking every time.
Of course, I could've been drunk when I read that...
__________________
"Treat her like a lady and she'll take you home everytime..."
Of course, I could've been drunk when I read that...
__________________
"Treat her like a lady and she'll take you home everytime..."
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Nimrod
Flight Schools and Training
5
12-12-2005 12:32 AM
