Federal Court Decisions

Date: 19971205

Docket: T-1277-96

BETWEEN:

     IN THE MATTER OF THE CITIZENSHIP ACT

     R.S.C., 1985, c. C-29

     AND IN THE MATTER OF an appeal from the

     decision of a Citizenship Judge

     AND IN THE MATTER OF

     Mrs. Sennur Dermenci,

     Appellant

     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

ROULEAU J.

[1]      The appellant appeals the decision of a Citizenship judge rendered on February 2, 1996, refusing her application for Canadian citizenship on the basis that she did not have an adequate knowledge of Canada and of the responsibilities and privileges of citizenship as required by paragraph 5(1)(e) of the Citizenship Act. The Citizenship Judge also declined to make a recommendation under subsection 15(1) of the Act requesting that the Minister exercise her discretion under subsection 5(3) or 5(4) to grant citizenship on compassionate grounds or for reasons of special hardship.

[2]      The appellant was born in Tavas, Turkey on January 8, 1957. She entered Canada on February 11, 1990 and was granted landed immigrant status on the same day. She is married and has two children. She has indicated in her grounds of appeal that, because of her work, when she appeared before the judge she was tired and nervous.

[3]      On February 2, 1996, the Citizenship Judge found that the applicant did not comply with the knowledge requirement pursuant to paragraph 5(1)(e) of the Act. The appellant was found not to have an adequate knowledge and understanding of Canada, more particularly on the following subject matters:

     - the principal caracteristics of the social and cultural history of Canada

     - the principal caracteristics of the political history of Canada

[4]      This appellant appeared before me at Montreal on November 26, 1997. She was questioned by the amicus curiae. Her children are both Canadian citizens; she is not aware of her husband's status since she has been divorced for a number of years.

[5]      She was aware that the Prime Minister of Canada is Mr. Jean Chrétien and that he is the head of the Liberal Party. She was able to name two of the opposition parties, the N.D.P. and the Conservatives. She was aware that the Prime Minister of Quebec is Mr. Lucien Bouchard who represents the Parti Québécois; that the party of opposition in Quebec is the Liberal Party. She knew the name of the Mayor of her municipality.

[6]      Geographically, she was able to answer the amicus curiae that there are ten provinces and two territories in Canada and was able to name seven of the provinces.

[7]      When questioned about the advantages of being a Canadian citizen, she answered that she would be eligible to obtain a passport and to travel abroad; that she would have the right to work and would be allowed to vote. She was aware that you have to be enumerated and must attend at a vote polling station in order to vote. With respect to obligations, she answered that one must respect the law and the rights of other Canadians.

[8]      With the consent of the amicus curiae, I am hereby recommending to the Minister that she grant citizenship to this appellant.

     JUDGE

OTTAWA, Ontario

December 5, 1997