Latest news with #PermanentResident
New Straits Times
30-07-2025
- Politics
- New Straits Times
Saifuddin: Entry permits for foreign spouses evaluated fairly
KUALA LUMPUR: Entry permit approvals for foreign spouses of Malaysians are based on fair and balanced considerations, regardless of gender, said Home Minister Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail. "Among the prerequisites for the MyPR application is that the applicant must first obtain an entry permit issued by the Malaysian Immigration Department," he said in a written parliamentary reply last night. He was responding to Syerleena Abdul Rashid (PH–Bukit Bendera), who questioned the government's processes for Permanent Resident (MyPR) applications, which she said placed an unfair burden on Malaysian women with foreign spouses. Saifuddin also said the issuance of entry permits to foreigners is in accordance with the provisions under Section 10(1) and (2) of the Immigration Act 1959/63, which grants the Director-General of Immigration the authority to issue entry permits based on the conditions and procedures set. Between 2013 to 2023, the approval rates for the wives of citizens stood at 22.3 per cent and the approval rates for husbands stood at 22.7 per cent. "Based on the percentage of approved entry permits, there is no significant difference between applications made by husbands and wives within the citizen category. "Therefore, each entry permit application in the husband and wife to citizen category is assessed fairly and equitably," he said. He added that several factors are taken into consideration when granting approvals. "For example, in the case of citizens' wives, issues related to welfare and neglect are considered," he said.
Daily Maverick
20-07-2025
- Politics
- Daily Maverick
Home Affairs and my journey to a Smart ID card: A positive tale through operational challenges
In recent times, as South Africans look to the Government of National Unity for signs of progress, it's encouraging to see that at least one ministry – Home Affairs – is beginning to deliver tangible results. In particular, we are led to believe that the old green ID books are being phased out in favour of new Smart ID cards. Even as we hear that good news, government promises are met with scepticism: some in the media and many residents claim the improvements are illusory and that systemic inefficiencies persist. My recent encounter with Home Affairs offers a nuanced view, equal parts disconcerting and optimistic. Several months ago, reassured by public statements, I booked a 9am appointment online at my local branch, in George, Western Cape. Upon arrival, I was directed to a short queue of about 10 people with appointments, while a second queue – nearly 10 times as long along the sidewalk — accommodated walk-ins. I felt quite chuffed that I had booked ahead; so far, so good. At the entrance, those of us with bookings were handed a clipboard bearing a printed list. We were asked to find and cross out our names to confirm attendance. While a practical system in theory, the font was so tiny that I had genuine difficulty locating my name. My eyesight is perfectly serviceable; the issue was the microscopic print. Inside, I handed my green ID book to the official who checked his screen and returned my book to me. No, he explained, I was not yet eligible to apply for a Smart ID because I wasn't born in South Africa. But, but… the public announcements! No, my ID book and Permanent Resident certificate weren't enough — yet. He offered two choices. I could — right then and there and for a fee — apply for a new green ID book somehow different from my current one, and once with that in hand, I could then return later, maybe two months, maybe four, for the Smart ID; or I could skip that step and wait to receive a text message confirming my eligibility for the Smart ID. I chose the latter. Smooth, until… The text never arrived but I kept tabs on public updates. A few months later, the ministry announced that non-citizen Permanent Residents could now apply for the Smart ID. That's me. The online application process was smooth and straightforward — until the very last step. I was prompted to sign and enter the location where I was signing. But there was no functionality to do this electronically no matter how I hovered my cursor. I couldn't sign nor input a location. I submitted it anyway, albeit with trepidation. Rejected. I tried again. Rejected. I saved, logged out, returned hours later, and without making any changes tried once more. This time, inexplicably, my application was accepted. Within minutes, I received a confirmation email and text instructing me to bring my green ID book and Permanent Resident certificate to Home Affairs. Right as rain! Naturally, I booked a fresh appointment. I arrived at 9.45am for a 10am slot, with no sidewalk queues at all, for neither the booked nor the walk-ins. The clipboard and its impossible font size returned. Once again, I strained to locate and strike through my name. I approached the same officer from my earlier visit. He noted the time, 9.45am, and asked me to wait until 10am. I pointed out that no one else was waiting, so please… He politely insisted that I take a seat. But, I said, there's no one here, can't you help me now? No, please take a seat. So I sat a mere three metres away, watching him do absolutely nothing for the next fourteen minutes. Uh-oh. I approached his desk at 9.59am. He found my record in the system, and handed me ticket number 70, directing me to the biometrics desk. Onward. The biometrics officer was also unoccupied and signalled that I would need to wait until my number 70 was formally called. Dutifully as ever, I sat in one of the many empty chairs not 10 metres from his desk. Sure enough, two minutes later, number 70. I provided fingerprints and a signature; into the booth for a photo. Done within five minutes. He told me to wait again until my number 70 came up for verification. Within minutes, I was seated with a new officer. Wow, this is now going very well. She asked to take my fingerprints. I pointed across the room to the biometrics chap and said I had just come from there so all was well. No, she said, I must verify that you are you. I can only presume that this was a precaution to ensure I hadn't changed identities in the 20m walk and four-minute wait. Okay, fine. The scan of my fingerprints produced an amber status, not green, not red. She asked me to try again. This time it turned red. I was sent back to redo the biometrics. The entire process was repeated, and once again I was instructed to wait until my number 70 was called. Operational challenges, as it is said. I found a seat close to the same officer, who had by then stepped away, possibly for a tea break. Twenty minutes later, she returned and number 70 was called. Again: amber, then red! She called over her manager and explained the issue. The manager authorised an override with her fingerprint. Then the officer used her own fingerprint to regain access to her computer. Bureaucratic ballet done and dusted. The officer now asked for my original Permanent Resident certificate. I handed it over, protected from wear and tear in the plastic sleeve I store it in. She asked if I had the original. I said yes, that's it, in your hand. With nary a glance, she made copies of both my certificate and ID book. As she reviewed my online application. I braced myself for a rejection or at least a request to sign, thinking back to the signature I'd never been able to provide online. She said not a word and must have used my signature from the biometrics officer. No issue, all in order. She informed me that I'd receive a notification in about six months to collect my Smart ID. It could be sooner, she added, but delays were likely given the newness of the system. Within the hour, I received confirmation of the day's progress via text and email. Pretty good. Weeks, not months And then — who needs six months? Less than five weeks later, I received a text and email telling me that my card was ready. One said my 'replacement ID', the other said 'ID reissue', but I pretended not to be concerned about the slight difference and the absence of the word 'Smart' that Home Affairs has so loudly proclaimed. Another 10am appointment, another tiny font, immediately at the reception chap's counter. Looked at his computer, gave me a number and sent me upstairs for ID collections. Up I go, into a smaller room with desks for three agents. I was second in the queue, and within five minutes I was at the desk of the only agent working, the very same one who weeks before couldn't verify my fingerprints downstairs. Up here, with a different fingerprint scanner, I figured this was going to be easy. No such luck. Several attempts. My fingerprints were not accepted. It seems that though fingerprints don't age, scanning machines can't handle old man skin — that's mine. She escorts me downstairs to a counter to await someone to override the system. Fifteen minutes later, my excitement drained by my impatience, along comes a young agent who slowly makes things happen; logging into the computer at that desk took another five minutes. But then it happened — I signed in a few places, he copied a few documents, and my Smart ID was in my hand! All good! But not fully the end of the story. As he handed me my old green ID book, he said I should keep it in a safe place. I said I'd rather just throw it away. No, he repeated, keep it in a safe place. Once at home I read the letter from Home Affairs that accompanied the card. It said, and I quote: '… and replaces the green barcoded identity document which should be handed in at the Department of Home Affairs when issued with a Smart ID Card'. But wait, the agent just gave it to me, told me to safeguard it, what's a guy to do now? Just smile. On the card itself is printed 'Date of Issue 30 May 2025'. That was a mere two weeks after my application was accepted, not the six months I was warned about, thank you. But if it was issued on 30 May, why did it take three weeks to tell me it was ready for collection? Just asking for a friend. So I now am relishing the last round of a rousing ride — an experience at once off-putting and ultimately positive. While much remains to be improved, my cautious optimism remains intact. Perhaps this is what progress looks like in South Africa: slow, uneven, but moving forward nonetheless. DM
NDTV
14-07-2025
- General
- NDTV
Indian Woman Living In Canada Says She Doesn't Want To Return: "We Love Our Life Here"
A 29-year-old Indian woman living in Canada shared her dilemma on Reddit, asking if she's a bad person for not wanting to return to India. In the post, the woman mentioned that she's married to an Indian man, and they're both financially stable in Canada. Initially, they planned to stay temporarily, but now they're uncertain about renewing their Permanent Resident (PR) status or pursuing citizenship as it nears expiration. The woman added that her plans have changed over time, and she and her husband have grown to love their life in Canada. Although their parents visit them annually, they're concerned about the potential challenges their parents may face in visiting them in the future. The couple is also apprehensive about returning to India due to concerns about safety and the desire for a peaceful life. This has led them to question whether their decision to stay in Canada is selfish. "We both initially decided to stay in Canada for only a few years but now we are at a place where our PR is going to expire, so we either have to get citizenship or renew PR and we are very contemplated. We love our life here, and our parents visit us once a year but we are worried they won't be able to in a few years. Reading about things happening in India is scaring us about returning, we want a peaceful life and don't know if it would be possible back home. Are we bad people if we decide to stay in Canada?" she asked. See the post here: by u/gfffgvhjjnki in AskIndia The post resonated with Reddit users, who offered words of encouragement. One user reassured her that it's perfectly fine to choose a place where she feels safe, happy, and at peace, emphasising that she's not a bad person for making that choice. Another user suggested she pursue Canadian citizenship and highlighted the benefits of holding a Canadian passport, which is one of the strongest in the world. A third user said, "Stay in Canada. Even high salaries in Tier 1 cities (INR 50 lakh+) cannot match the WLB of a foreign country and are unlikely to do so. Unless you are in a position of somehow getting Canadian Salaries in India, don't come back. Get your parents there too - that is the part to solve." A fourth wrote, "I work in FAANG, my colleagues are the ones who make 70+ in India, but their work-life balance is always accommodate meetings in US timezones and we never log in early or late." A fifth said, "India is not easy, taxes and surcharges have become very high with little to nothing to show by way of infrastructure improvements. Things are a challenge here. And you are still young. My sincere request is that you get your citizenship done. Having a Canadian passport is quite a thing."
Newsweek
04-07-2025
- Politics
- Newsweek
Green Card Holder Wrongfully Detained by ICE For Nearly 50 Days
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A green card holder who has been in the United States for 20 years spent over a month in federal custody, according to KSL News. Junior Dioses, a lawful permanent resident, was returning from a trip to Peru on April 28 when federal agents stopped him at a Texas airport. Dioses spent two days in custody at the airport, followed by 48 days detained at an ICE facility in Conover, Texas. "When I was there, I kept thinking every day, 'Why am I here?'" Dioses told KSL News. Newsweek has contacted the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP, as well as the man's attorney, for comment. A man holds a United States Permanent Resident card, otherwise known as a Green Card. Image for illustration purposes only. A man holds a United States Permanent Resident card, otherwise known as a Green Card. Image for illustration purposes only. Getty Images Why It Matters The case comes amid a crackdown on immigration by President Donald Trump's administration. The Republican leader pledged to remove millions of immigrants without legal status as part of a hard-line mass deportation policy. However, concerns have been raised as dozens of cases have emerged of green card holders getting caught in the immigration raids. The White House has said that anyone living in the country illegally is a "criminal." What To Know Federal immigration authorities pointed to two prior convictions, one for failing to stop for a police officer in 2006 and another for disorderly conduct in 2019, as grounds for deportation, according to KSL News. The man's attorney argued that his client's record does not justify deportation under immigration law. Adam Crayk, managing partner at Stowell Crayk, said that while permanent residents can be deported for offenses that meet certain legal criteria, Dioses' past charges fall short of that standard. Crayk pointed out that existing case law makes it clear these offenses are not considered crimes involving moral turpitude. He also criticized immigration authorities for pursuing deportation without fully understanding the law, saying they wrongly detained Dioses and started removal proceedings that should never have been initiated. "Most people when they think of '(deporting) criminals' they don't think of Junior. They think of the guy selling drugs to our kids, that guy (who) murdered someone, that guy (who) engaged in horrific violent behavior," Crayk told KSL News. "Permanent residents can be deported ... if you do things that under our law qualify for deportable offenses." "There's already case law that says these are not crimes involving moral turpitude," Crayk added. "Had anyone on the government side done the research, they would have known they had inappropriately incarcerated and inappropriately begun deportation proceedings against someone who should have never been in that type of position." Under U.S. immigration law, any noncitizen convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude — if it was committed within five to ten years of admission and resulted in a sentence of at least one year in jail — can be deported. U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services confirms that this standard is well established, with "extensive" case law describing moral turpitude as conduct so offensive that it "shocks the public conscience" and is "inherently base, vile, or depraved, contrary to the rules of morality and the duties owed between man and man, either one's fellow man or society in general." Crayk said that Dioses' prior offenses do not meet this definition under the law. Although he filed a motion to end the deportation proceedings — which the government did not challenge — Dioses was still held for another week. Crayk says this extra time in custody was likely caused by bureaucratic uncertainty about a possible appeal that ultimately never happened. What People Are Saying Crayk told KSL News: "He didn't have his green card taken away. He's still a permanent resident and on track to become a citizen. For Junior to spend 48 days in an immigration custody on charges that were never legitimate." Dioses told the outlet: "I just want to spend time with my kids, go to the lake and have fun."
The Star
03-07-2025
- Sport
- The Star
Mexican boxer Chavez Jr arrested by US immigration officers, DHS says
May 14, 2025; Los Angeles, California, USA; Julio Cesar Chavez Jr. speaks at press conference in anticipation of his fight against Jake Paul at Avalon Hollywood Theater. Mandatory Credit: Gary A. Vasquez-Imagn Images/File Photo MEXICO CITY (Reuters) -Mexican boxer Julio Cesar Chavez Jr. has been arrested by U.S. immigration officers and faces deportation, the Department of Homeland Security said in a statement on Thursday. Chavez Jr., 39, who lost a bout to influencer-turned-boxer Jake Paul on Saturday, had an active arrest warrant against him in Mexico. The DHS said the warrant was related to involvement in organized crime and trafficking firearms, ammunition and explosives. The department added that Chavez Jr. made "multiple fraudulent statements on his application to become a Lawful Permanent Resident" and was determined to be in the U.S. illegally on June 27. "Under President Trump, no one is above the law - including world-famous athletes," said DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin. Michael Goldstein, an attorney for Chavez Jr., said his client was detained outside his home by more than two dozen Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers and called the allegations "outrageous." "They blocked off his street and took him into custody, leaving his family without knowledge of his whereabouts," Goldstein said in a statement. "Mr. Chavez is a public figure and has been living out in the public and just fought Jake Paul in a televised boxing match before millions of viewers." The Mexican prosecutor's office said in a statement that they had been contacted for the boxer's removal. His fight against Paul played to a sold-out crowd at the Honda Center in Anaheim, California, where the 28-year-old American triumphed in a unanimous decision after 10 rounds. The event's joint promoters, MVP Promotions and Golden Boy Promotions, did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Chavez Jr. is the son of former three-division world champion Julio Cesar Chavez, an iconic figure in Mexican sports who is widely considered the greatest fighter the country ever produced. Chavez Jr. won the WBC middleweight championship by defeating German Sebastian Zbik in 2011, but lost the title to Argentine Sergio "Maravilla" Martinez in 2012. His career has been overshadowed by numerous controversies and suspensions. In 2009, he tested positive for a banned substance furosemide, resulting in a seven-month suspension and a $10,000 fine. Four years later, the Nevada Athletic Commission fined him $900,000 and imposed a nine-month suspension for failing a drug test. His wife was previously married to Edgar Guzman Lopez, the son of former Sinaloa Cartel leader "El Chapo." Edgar Guzman Lopez was assassinated in 2008. Chavez Jr. currently has a record of 54 wins, six losses and one draw, with 34 knockouts. (Reporting by Brendan O'Brien and Bhargav Acharya, Lizbeth Diaz, Angelica Medina and Diego Oré in Mexico City, Amy Tennery in New York; Editing by Chizu Nomiyama and Bill Berkrot)
