这案子,加拿大移民官员/记者理不清了;你怎么看?(更新:移民部长特批,男孩将先持TRV来加拿大,然后办PR)

  • 主题发起人 主题发起人 ccc
  • 开始时间 开始时间

ccc

难得糊涂
管理成员
VIP
注册
2003-04-13
消息
238,964
荣誉分数
37,372
声望点数
1,393
Couple pins hope on Trudeau government to be reunited with four-year-old son
HUGH ADAMI, OTTAWA CITIZEN
More from Hugh Adami, Ottawa Citizen

Published on: December 18, 2015 | Last Updated: December 18, 2015 7:22 PM EST
this-is-a-handout-picture-of-four-year-old-daksh-sood-taken.jpeg


Bhavna Bajaj and her supporters plan to provide Prime Minister Justin Trudeau with this photo of four-year-old Daksh Sood and his plea.

A mother and some supporters are hoping they won’t be turned away from the Prime Minister’s Office Tuesday, and if Justin Trudeau is around and agrees to meet them, all the better.

Though Bhavna Bajaj might have unrealistic expectations of how quickly the new Liberal government could move to finally allow her four-year-old son, Daksh, into Canada, she is buoyed by its efforts in settling Syrian refugees in this country. If it can do that for so many in such little time, she says a little boy who needs to be with his parents shouldn’t pose a problem.

Bajaj and her husband, Aman Sood, have been separated from Daksh, who lives with his paternal grandparents in India, for almost three years. Efforts to convince the former Conservative government to reunite the family failed.

Immigration officers at the Canadian consulate in Delhi only added to their despair. One who reviewed their application in 2014 to have Daksh admitted on humanitarian and compassionate grounds actually concluded that Daksh was better off in India, residing in an environment “culturally and linguistically familiar to him.”

This year, immigration officers at the consulate did not seem to have understood two separate visa applications filed by the parents’ lawyer. The first application was returned because it was believed the child needed a work visa instead of a temporary resident permit (TRP). The second was sent back on the grounds that the application should have been for a business visitor’s visa and not a TRP.

“It’s so frustrating,” says Bajaj.

The application for a TRP has been sent to India again. If Daksh is allowed into Canada, they will seek a permanent resident’s visa — which his parents already have under the skilled worker category — on humanitarian and compassionate grounds.

The couple’s troubles with Immigration, first reported by the Citizen a year ago, stem from failing to disclose they had a young son they intended to sponsor before they arrived in Canada in January 2013. The plan was to bring Daksh to Ottawa once they were settled.

On Tuesday, Bajaj and her supporters plan to go to the Langevin Building, home of the Prime Minister’s Office. The group wants to present copies of an online petition — signed by almost 12,000 people, mostly Canadians — urging the government to reunite the family.

Perth resident and community activist Mathew Behrens, who started the petition last January after reading about the family’s plight, notes that Trudeau is also the government’s youth minister, as well as a father. “He’s been speaking a lot about children, so he would recognize the best interests for Daksh are to be with his family.”

From Langevin, the group plans to present the same petition at Immigration Minister John McCallum’s office. An accompanying letter from Behrens cites a promise McCallum made while campaigning in the recent federal election: “On October 8, 2015, you declared: ‘Liberals are going to fix our immigration system, and make sure that families can be together, growing their communities and local economies alongside their loved ones.'”

Bajaj says she will ask that McCallum use his ministerial discretion to immediately grant a temporary resident permit for Daksh.

Sood is in India visiting his son and will return to Canada on Dec. 27. Bajaj hopes a TRP would be granted in time for the boy to be on that flight with him.

Bajaj, who speaks to her son daily, says when she told him the other day that she misses him, he replied: “Don’t you know I’m coming to Canada with father?”

“He’s getting big now.” says Bajaj. “He needs his mom for all the playing, activities and learning.” She says her husband’s parents struggle to care for the boy because of health problems. “It’s difficult for them to take him out, to take him to parks.”

She says if this latest attempt to bring him to Canada fails, she will make plans to return to India.

After the couple landed in Montreal on Jan. 28, 2013, Canada Border Service agents began questioning them about their son back home. They were given two choices: State their intention of sponsoring the child but return to India while Immigration reviewed their application, or, then and there, sign a declaration form that they would never attempt to sponsor their son.

They said they agreed to the latter under duress and confusion, following five hours of questioning.
 
这对夫妇申请移民时隐瞒了儿子的信息,而且入境时又不愿意回印度等,而是签了文件声明以后不会申请儿子移民,那还有什么可说的,肯定是不能批准他们儿子的申请了,否则法规和法律文件都是儿戏了。他们要对自己的所作所为负责。
 
更有趣的是,家长在试图为孩子申请a temporary resident permit (TRP) (visitor visa),入境后再申请a permanent resident’s visa。

家长、记者一桶桨糊。

The application for a TRP has been sent to India again. If Daksh is allowed into Canada, they will seek a permanent resident’s visa — which his parents already have under the skilled worker category — on humanitarian and compassionate grounds.
 
这个,估计不是移民官糊涂。而是家长/记者另一桶桨糊。

This year, immigration officers at the consulate did not seem to have understood two separate visa applications filed by the parents’ lawyer. The first application was returned because it was believed the child needed a work visa instead of a temporary resident permit (TRP). The second was sent back on the grounds that the application should have been for a business visitor’s visa and not a TRP.
 
家长是故意的
 
这个是明智的:

She says if this latest attempt to bring him to Canada fails, she will make plans to return to India.
 
既然这么想要儿子,那当初申请时为什么隐瞒儿子信息,不明白是怎么想的。
 
他们当初登陆的时候,移民官应该取消他们的移民资格,当即遣返。

After the couple landed in Montreal on Jan. 28, 2013, Canada Border Service agents began questioning them about their son back home. They were given two choices: State their intention of sponsoring the child but return to India while Immigration reviewed their application, or, then and there, sign a declaration form that they would never attempt to sponsor their son.

They said they agreed to the latter under duress and confusion, following five hours of questioning.
 
既然这么想要儿子,那当初申请时为什么隐瞒儿子信息,不明白是怎么想的。

他们的贼心眼不比中国人少。:D

The couple’s troubles with Immigration, first reported by the Citizen a year ago, stem from failing to disclose they had a young son they intended to sponsor before they arrived in Canada in January 2013. The plan was to bring Daksh to Ottawa once they were settled.
 
人权大于法权
法律是为人服务的
无论怎么说,四岁的孩子是无辜的,四岁的孩子有权利与父母在一起生活。
印度人不是恐怖分子,是勤劳和平的民族
加拿大可以接受四岁印度孩子与父母团聚,加拿大更适合这个孩子生活
 
好像不会,一般就是表上“忘”填的dependents就永远没资格被担保移民了。
 
他们当初登陆的时候,移民官应该取消他们的移民资格,当即遣返。

After the couple landed in Montreal on Jan. 28, 2013, Canada Border Service agents began questioning them about their son back home. They were given two choices: State their intention of sponsoring the child but return to India while Immigration reviewed their application, or, then and there, sign a declaration form that they would never attempt to sponsor their son.

They said they agreed to the latter under duress and confusion, following five hours of questioning.
他们的贼心眼不比中国人少。:D

The couple’s troubles with Immigration, first reported by the Citizen a year ago, stem from failing to disclose they had a young son they intended to sponsor before they arrived in Canada in January 2013. The plan was to bring Daksh to Ottawa once they were settled.

既然已经接受孩子父母了,过去的就翻篇了。
村长,你们可以批评政府当初错了,不可以把板子打在四岁孩子屁股上
孩子的父母为了选择更好的生活也是为孩子未来更好的生活,作为一个父亲,我理解那对父母
他们没有犯罪,不丢人。
我们没什么高尚到嘲笑他们
 
既然已经接受孩子父母了,过去的就翻篇了。
村长,你们可以批评政府当初错了,不可以把板子打在四岁孩子屁股上
孩子的父母为了选择更好的生活也是为孩子未来更好的生活,作为一个父亲,我理解那对父母
他们没有犯罪,不丢人。
我们没什么高尚到嘲笑他们

你错了。这里不是嘲笑。

回去看看移民法规。如果说移民官错了,错在当时他们入境的时候没有把他们直接遣返。

仔细看看那报道,当时入境的时候谈了五个小时。

他们当时签了文件,宣称以后不申请孩子移民才把他们放进来的。要翻篇的应该是他们自己,他们可以自愿返回印度。
 
最后编辑:
你错了。这里不是嘲笑。

回去看看移民法规。如果说移民官错了,错在当时他们入境的时候没有把他们直接遣返。

仔细看看那报道,当时入境的时候谈了五个小时。

他们当时签了文件,宣称以后不申请孩子移民才把他们放进来的。要翻篇的应该是他们自己,他们可以自愿返回印度。

贼心眼不是嘲笑,那算你是幽默?
这个过程摆在那里,过去了,翻篇吧
这里几个讨论的,甚至我有认识的,当初移民可也是费了老大力气了
现在成功了,就嘲笑别人是圣母?
特别讨厌那些穷骨头稍许阔了点,就翻脸对待更穷的人

道理谁不懂?既然LZ问别人看法,我提我的看法
从四岁孩子的角度看,加拿大更适合那个孩子,一个是孩子父母在加拿大,二是加拿大是民主富裕国家,更利于孩子生活
最后,提醒大家,印度人是很好的加拿大公民资源,他们爱好和平勤奋工作,不是恐怖分子
 
人权大于法权
法律是为人服务的
无论怎么说,四岁的孩子是无辜的,四岁的孩子有权利与父母在一起生活。
印度人不是恐怖分子,是勤劳和平的民族
加拿大可以接受四岁印度孩子与父母团聚,加拿大更适合这个孩子生活

那还要法规何用。

当时入境的时候,他们是同政府有约才放他们进来的。他们当时就被建议回去重新一起申请儿子移民,他们放弃了。
 
后退
顶部