Sent to secondary: what actually happens in a Canadian port of entry examination

The booth at the end of the hall does not feel like a legal proceeding. It is one. Under section 18(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act every person seeking to enter Canada must appear for an examination, and section 28(b) of the Regulations provides that a person who seeks to enter is, by that act, making an application. The officer is not making conversation. They are deciding whether you have a right to enter, may be authorised to enter, or neither.

Most examinations end in under a minute. The ones that do not follow a structure that is written down, and knowing the structure is the difference between a stressful hour and a bad outcome.

Primary: six questions, and what each one is really for

Officers at the primary inspection line work from a short set of questions designed to settle citizenship, residency, intention, employment, length of stay and identity as quickly as possible. Not every traveller is asked all six.

Two things are deliberately absent. Officers at primary are instructed not to ask about criminality — that belongs in a private setting at secondary — and they are told not to conduct in-depth examinations at the booth, because it creates queues. A long conversation at primary usually means you are about to be referred.

At most international airports the first step is now a kiosk rather than an officer. Travellers with an ePassport have the chip photo compared with the photo taken at the kiosk; those whose biometrics were enrolled earlier verify by fingerprint. A no-match generates a referral to immigration secondary on its own.

Why people get referred

Some referrals are not a judgment about you at all. The immigration secondary referral list makes referral mandatory for a defined set of travellers, including:

• anyone believed inadmissible under sections 34 to 42 of the Act;
• anyone whose citizenship or status is doubtful, or whose documents look doubtful;
• anyone refusing to answer questions;
• anyone refused entry into another country;
• Canadian citizens travelling on an emergency passport issued abroad;
• permanent residents who have had extended absences from Canada;
• foreign nationals intending to stay longer than six months;
• foreign nationals seeking medical treatment, or who appear ill; and
• foreign workers and students on first entry.

Beyond the list, an officer may refer anyone they believe should be looked at more closely — doubts about identity, a suspicion of a criminal record, a belief that a work or study permit is needed, or concern that the length of stay being requested does not match the travel plans described.

Inside immigration secondary

Before questioning, the officer reviews the referral, takes your identity and travel documents, looks at the air ticket if you flew, and opens the referral to see what you were flagged for. A search of the Global Case Management System is departmental policy for every person referred, run on name and date of birth rather than an application number, so that anything attached to a close name match surfaces.

The questioning then widens well beyond the six. Expect some combination of:

• Intentions: how long, where in Canada, where you will stay, whether you intend to work or study.
• Funds: whether you hold a return ticket, and what money you have access to in Canada. If someone else is supporting you, the officer may contact them to confirm it.
• Personal history: occupation, current employment, family or friends in Canada, marital status — questions aimed at whether you will leave at the end of your stay.
• Background: health, any arrest, charge or conviction, and any previous refusal of entry to or removal from Canada.

Counters at secondary are designed for speed, not privacy. Officers are expected to move to a private setting where medical information or criminality comes up, and what you say is protected by the Privacy Act — subject to the information-sharing arrangements Canada has with United States immigration and border agencies.

If you do not speak English or French comfortably, say so at the start. An officer may use a family member or a colleague for a basic examination, but is expected to suspend and wait for an accredited interpreter once it becomes apparent that you may be inadmissible or that more intrusive questions are needed — because a decision built on a poor interpretation can be struck down on judicial review.

Your phone

CBSA can examine a personal digital device, and the obligation to provide the password when asked sits with you. The agency’s stated position is that devices are examined where a concern exists that border laws may have been contravened — not as a routine step in every examination. Before looking, the officer is required to disable network connectivity, so the examination is limited to what is stored on the device rather than what sits in the cloud. Officers must have completed the digital-device examination training, obtain approval from a superintendent or chief before examining, and record in their notes which indicators prompted it and what contravention those indicators point to.

Declining is not a neutral option: it can lead to the device being detained under section 101 of the Customs Act, or seized.

When the right to counsel actually starts

This is the most widely misunderstood part of a port of entry examination. For routine information-gathering to establish admissibility, there is no right to counsel. The Supreme Court decided the point in Dehghani v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1993] 1 S.C.R. 1053, holding that a secondary examination at a port of entry is not a detention within the meaning of paragraph 10(b) of the Charter, and that the principles of fundamental justice do not require counsel for the information-gathering done at these interviews.

The right is triggered by what happens next, not by how long the examination takes:

• an examination that is long and exhaustive, but still confined to establishing admissibility — no right to counsel, although the officer may allow you to contact one;
• being told to come back another day for further examination, without restraint — not a detention, so no right to counsel;
• restraints used, or placement in a holding cell even temporarily — the officer must tell you the reason and advise you of your right to counsel;
• lengthy questioning by another agency such as the RCMP or CSIS — this may amount to detention, and you must be advised; and
• arrest for a criminal offence — you must be told the reason and advised of the right to counsel.

One practical point: if your representative is already at the port with you, policy is that the officer should allow them to remain, as long as they do not interfere — even though there is no obligation to permit it.

Five ways an examination ends

1. You are admitted. For a temporary resident the normal authorised period is six months under subsection 183(2) of the Regulations, granted routinely even where you asked for less. The general conditions in subsection 183(1) apply automatically: leave by the end of your stay, do not work without authorisation, do not study without authorisation. Where the officer sets a period shorter or longer than six months, that decision is documented on a visitor record. No period can run past the expiry of your passport. Parents and grandparents entering on a Super Visa are one of the few cases where the officer notates the passport stamp with the authorised expiry rather than leaving it blank.
2. Further examination. Under section 23 of the Act an officer can authorise entry so the examination can be completed later. Section 43(1) of the Regulations then imposes mandatory conditions: report in person at the time and place specified, do not work, do not study, and report to an officer at a port of entry if you withdraw. This is not admission — no temporary resident or permanent resident status is acquired — and failing to report can lead to an arrest warrant.
3. You withdraw. Under section 42 of the Regulations, an officer who examines a foreign national seeking entry who says they want to withdraw their application shall allow it, unless a report under subsection 44(1) is being prepared or has been prepared. You are given an Allowed to Leave Canada form (IMM 1282B), and you are free to seek entry again once the reason for inadmissibility is resolved. Officers are told to consider whether the objectives of the Act are better served by allowing withdrawal before writing a report — which is why the sequence matters so much.
4. You are directed to leave, or directed back. Where an officer is unable to examine you, section 40 of the Regulations requires a written direction to leave Canada (form BSF 503). Where you are seeking entry from the United States and no officer can complete the examination, or a decision-maker is unavailable, section 41 allows a direction to return to the United States (form BSF 505) with the date and place of the resumed examination on it.
5. A report is written. Where the officer believes you are inadmissible, a report under subsection 44(1) goes to a Minister’s delegate, who may issue a removal order or refer the matter to the Immigration Division for an admissibility hearing. You can also be detained under paragraph 55(3)(a) of the Act if detention is necessary for the examination to be completed.

If you are a temporary resident

A visa or an electronic travel authorisation is permission to travel to Canada and board a carrier. It is not admission. Admissibility is decided at the port of entry on the day, on the evidence in front of the officer, and the officer can reach a different conclusion from the visa office. That is the single most useful thing to understand before you fly.

The practical consequence: the case you made in your visitor visa or study permit application is the case you should be able to make again at the booth, in the same terms. Officers are alert to a stated purpose at the border that does not match the one on file.

If you are a permanent resident

Subsection 27(1) of the Act gives a permanent resident the right to enter and remain in Canada, and subsection 19(2) requires an officer to allow entry once satisfied that you hold that status — regardless of non-compliance with the residency obligation in section 28 or the presence of other inadmissibility grounds. An officer cannot refuse you entry.

What an officer can do is write a subsection 44(1) report. If a departure order follows and it is not yet in force, you still have the right to enter Canada until a final determination has been made on your loss of status and the removal order comes into force. Procedural fairness applies throughout: you are entitled to know the case to be met, to put in evidence answering it, and to have that evidence fairly considered.

Two document points. The permanent resident card is the prescribed document for boarding a commercial carrier bound for Canada; without one you need a permanent resident travel document from a visa office before flying. And the burden of proving you are a permanent resident, if you arrive without documents, is on you — although an officer can authorise entry without documents, and can adjourn under section 23 so you can go and get them.

If you are a Canadian citizen

Subsection 19(1) of the Act gives a Canadian citizen the right to enter and remain. You are still required to appear for an examination, but once the officer establishes that you are a citizen, the examination should end and you should be allowed to enter without further delay. Policy is explicit that it is not appropriate for officers at immigration secondary to draw out further personal information from a Canadian citizen — although you may be asked to provide information voluntarily where it helps assess a foreign national travelling with you.

Saying you want to immigrate is not a trap

Subsection 22(2) of the Act provides that an intention to become a permanent resident does not preclude someone from becoming a temporary resident, if the officer is satisfied they will leave at the end of the authorised period. Wanting to await the outcome of an inland permanent residence application can be entirely legitimate, and officers are told to distinguish that person from someone who has no intention of leaving if the application is refused.

The factors weighed are the processing time for the permanent residence application, your means of support, your obligations and ties at home, whether you would in fact leave if the application were refused, and whether you have complied with the rules while in Canada. Answering the question honestly and specifically is stronger than deflecting it.

How to prepare

• Carry the proof, do not just describe it. Return or onward ticket, proof of funds you can actually reach, the address where you will stay, and the letter or contract behind your stated purpose.
• Match your own file. Say the same thing at the border that you said in the application. Where circumstances have changed, say that they have changed and why.
• First entry on a permit? Workers and students are referred on first entry as a matter of policy. Bring the letter of introduction, the offer of employment or letter of acceptance, and proof of funds. A referral here is the process working normally.
• Permanent resident who has been away? Bring evidence of the days you have been in Canada over the last five years before you travel, not after the question is asked.
• Answer the question asked. Long, unprompted explanations generate more questions. So does an answer that shifts once documents appear.
• Never misrepresent. A finding of misrepresentation under section 40 of the Act carries a five-year bar, and it is a far worse outcome than the refusal it was meant to avoid. If you do not know an answer, say so.

Questions we are asked about the border most often are collected in the Help Centre. If you are travelling with a complication — an old refusal, a record, a residency obligation you have not met, a permit you are hoping to pick up at the airport — it is worth an hour before the flight rather than an hour at the booth. Contact us today to discuss your case.

Sources: Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, ss. 15, 18, 19, 22(2), 23, 24(1), 27, 28, 40, 44(1), 55(3)(a); Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, ss. 28(b), 37(c), 40, 41, 42, 43(1), 183, 185; IRCC and CBSA, ENF 4: Port of Entry Examinations, last updated 28 February 2024; CBSA, Examining personal digital devices at the Canadian border; Dehghani v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1993] 1 S.C.R. 1053. Checked 22 September 2026. General information, not legal advice.