Direct answer
A person who has committed or been convicted of an offence can be inadmissible to Canada on criminality grounds, under section 36 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. It is not a dead end: the law provides ways out. Deemed rehabilitation applies automatically, after a certain period, for the least serious offences. Individual rehabilitation is requested from IRCC once at least five years have passed since the end of the sentence and since the acts, with processing that can exceed a year. For a conviction in Canada, the route is a record suspension from the Parole Board of Canada. And for an immediate travel need, the temporary resident permit can allow entry despite inadmissibility, for a maximum of three years. A single impaired driving conviction is enough to block entry: it is the case that surprises people most. For a real file, consult a lawyer or a regulated consultant.
The frame first: what this article is, and what it is not
This subject touches lives, trips cancelled at the airport, immigration projects hanging on an event sometimes fifteen years old. I will treat it like the rest of this site: factually, without judgement, describing the mechanisms the law provides.
A disclaimer that matters more here than anywhere else: I am an independent writer, neither a lawyer nor a regulated immigration consultant. Inadmissibility is one of the most technical areas of Canadian immigration law, where every file depends on the precise facts, the legal characterization of the offence and its Canadian equivalent. This article gives you the map of the territory; for your itinerary, you need a professional: an immigration lawyer or a regulated consultant, whose selection criteria I describe in finding reliable immigration help. This site informs; it does not give legal advice.
What the law says: section 36 of the IRPA
Inadmissibility on criminality grounds rests on section 36 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the IRPA. The provision distinguishes two levels.
Criminality, on the one hand: it covers, notably, people convicted abroad of an offence that, if committed in Canada, would be an indictable offence, or of two separate offences. Serious criminality, on the other: it covers offences whose Canadian equivalent is punishable by a maximum sentence of ten years or more, among other situations. The distinction is not academic: it determines which ways out are available, their timelines and their costs.
Two points often surprise. First, a conviction is not always necessary: the law allows acts committed abroad to be held against a person in certain configurations, even without a formal finding of guilt, depending on the nature of the file. Second, the age of the matter does not erase it by itself: without rehabilitation, an old conviction keeps producing effects at the border, years or decades later.
The equivalency analysis: it is not the offence's name that counts
Here is the central mechanism, the one behind most surprises: the equivalency analysis. Canadian authorities do not stop at the offence's name in your country. They look for that offence's equivalent in the Canadian Criminal Code, comparing the constituent elements of the two provisions, then reason from the maximum sentence provided in Canada for that equivalent.
The consequences are concrete. An offence classified as a mere infraction at home can have a serious Canadian equivalent, and vice versa. A road fine generally poses no problem; a hit-and-run or dangerous driving does. The reasoning is done text against text, and it is exactly the kind of analysis a professional conducts before any application: correctly characterizing the Canadian equivalent means knowing whether you fall under criminality, serious criminality, or outside section 36 altogether.
Hence my constant advice: do not self-diagnose, in either direction. I have read as many accounts of travellers turned away over a matter they thought trivial as of people who stopped themselves from travelling over an offence with no blocking equivalent.
The case that surprises everyone: impaired driving
If you remember only one example, make it this one. Since the legislative tightening of 2018, driving while impaired, by alcohol or drugs, is classified as serious criminality: the maximum sentence of its Canadian equivalent was raised to ten years. A single conviction is therefore enough to make a person inadmissible.
Concretely, a driver convicted of drunk driving in France, Belgium or elsewhere, even once, even long ago, even with a simple fine and a licence suspension, can be refused entry to Canada. It is the situation that surprises the most travellers, because many countries treat this offence as a traffic matter, while Canada treats it as criminal. And the serious criminality classification has a direct consequence: automatic deemed rehabilitation is not available; an active process is required.
If you have this kind of history and a trip planned, do not take your chances at the booth hoping the question will not come up: statements at the border are binding, and a misrepresentation creates a problem far worse than the initial inadmissibility. Prepare the file before booking.
Deemed rehabilitation: the automatic effect of time
First way out, the simplest when it applies: deemed rehabilitation. For the least serious offences, the law considers the person rehabilitated after a certain period has passed since the sentence was fully served, automatically, with no application to file and no fee to pay.
The conditions bear on the nature of the offence, its Canadian equivalent, the number of offences and the time elapsed. Two major limits must be understood. First, serious criminality is excluded: an impaired driving conviction after the 2018 tightening, for example, is not cured by the mere passage of time. Second, "automatic" does not mean "comfortable": it is the officer at the border who assesses whether the conditions are met, at the moment you present yourself. Many travellers in this situation have a documented legal opinion prepared as a precaution, to present if questioned, precisely to avoid debating criminal equivalency at an airport booth.
Individual rehabilitation: the application that settles the matter
Second way out: individual rehabilitation, also called an application for rehabilitation. It is for those who do not benefit from deemed rehabilitation, either because the time has not passed, or because the offence is serious, meaning its Canadian equivalent is punishable by a maximum sentence of ten years or more.
The entry condition is temporal: IRCC requires that at least five years have passed both since the complete end of the sentence, including fines, probation and licence measures, and since the commission of the acts. Before that five-year mark, the application is not receivable; the temporary resident permit, described below, then remains the only option for travelling.
On the merits, the application is a demonstration: you must establish that you are rehabilitated and that the risk of reoffending is very low. A stable lifestyle, a work history, family ties, training, the absence of any new incident, reference letters: the file tells the story of the person you have become, with evidence. It is substantive work, not a form.
Finally, the parameter everyone underestimates: time. IRCC warns that processing a rehabilitation application can exceed a year. If your project, a trip, a transfer, immigration, has a deadline, the application must be prepared well in advance, and that is exactly what justifies the parallel two-track strategy I describe further down.
Convicted in Canada: record suspension, not rehabilitation
Third scenario, that of people convicted in Canada itself: rehabilitation is not the right route. For a Canadian conviction, the prescribed mechanism is the record suspension, formerly called a "pardon", requested from the Parole Board of Canada, not from IRCC.
The logic is different: it is not about neutralizing a foreign offence for immigration purposes, but about setting aside a Canadian criminal record, with its own waiting periods and eligibility conditions.
And for mixed situations, the rule is simple to state: with convictions both in Canada and abroad, both processes are generally needed, the record suspension for the Canadian side and rehabilitation for the foreign side. One without the other leaves the inadmissibility standing. This is typically the file that justifies professional support from the outset, to sequence the two procedures correctly.
The temporary resident permit: the emergency fix, not the cure
That leaves the case of the immediate need: a business trip, a family event, medical treatment, and an inadmissibility in the way. For this, the law provides the temporary resident permit, the TRP.
The principle: an officer can issue a TRP when the reason for the stay outweighs the risk the person represents. It is a case-by-case, discretionary weighing, where the quality of the file matters enormously: a precise and documented purpose, the age and relative gravity of the facts, conduct since, guarantees of departure. The duration is limited, up to a maximum of three years, and the permit may cover one entry or several stays depending on what the officer grants.
Two characteristics to know before betting on this route. On the one hand, there is no appeal against a TRP refusal: the decision is discretionary, and a refusal essentially leaves the option of resubmitting a better-built file. On the other, the TRP settles nothing on the merits: it allows a stay despite the inadmissibility, which remains.
That is why the most common strategy among well-advised people is to run both processes in parallel: a TRP to meet the immediate need to travel, and a rehabilitation application to extinguish the inadmissibility once and for all. The TRP buys time; rehabilitation solves the problem.
The fees: orders of magnitude, not current amounts
Let me pause on fees, with a deliberate precaution: the amounts for these processes are indexed periodically, and I refuse to present as current any figures that may no longer be by the time you read this.
The last fee grid I can date with certainty is that of December 1, 2023. It placed the orders of magnitude as follows: around $230 for rehabilitation in cases of simple criminality and around $1,150 for serious criminality, around $230 for a temporary resident permit, around $460 for an authorization to return to Canada after a removal order, and status restoration fees by category, around $229 to $384. These amounts have probably been indexed since. Before any submission, consult IRCC's official fee list, the only valid reference on the day of payment.
Above all, remember the hierarchy: serious criminality costs several times the simple criminality rate, which reflects the depth of review. And these fees are only part of the real cost, which includes the court documents to obtain, certified translations and, most often, a professional's fees.
Building the file: method and pitfalls
Whatever the route, inadmissibility files share the same documentary requirements, and the same pitfalls.
The documentary base first: the complete court decisions, not just a record extract; proof the sentence was served, fines paid, probation completed, licence restored; and the foreign statutes applicable at the time of the facts, needed for the equivalency analysis. Gathering these documents takes weeks when the facts are old or the court far away: start there. Translations must be certified, and the whole checked for consistency with the rigour I describe in immigration application mistakes.
Then the absolute trap, which I repeat because it ruins salvageable files: concealment. Failing to declare a conviction in a visa, eTA or permit application, hoping to slip through, exposes you to a misrepresentation finding, with an additional multi-year inadmissibility, separate from the criminal one. The police databases of many countries are accessible to Canadian authorities. A declared and documented history can be dealt with; a concealed one is paid for twice.
One final word on the overall calendar, because it commands everything. Between collecting judgments, translations, drafting the rehabilitation file and processing that can exceed a year, the substantive route adds up to eighteen months or more in many cases. The TRP, faster, remains subject to the processing times of the application and the office concerned. The practical consequence: the worst configuration is the plane ticket already bought. Reverse the order: first the legal clarification of your situation, then the processes, and only at the end the bookings, following the reading of timelines I describe for IRCC processing times.
Finally, beware of commercial promises: nobody can "guarantee" a TRP or a rehabilitation, and processing times are not negotiable. The criteria for choosing a lawyer or regulated consultant, checking their registration and avoiding diploma-mill outfits are in my guide to immigration help.
Inadmissibility across projects: visitor, worker, permanent resident
A word on how inadmissibility cuts across different projects, because its effects are not limited to tourism.
For a simple stay, the question arises at the visa or eTA application stage, which includes questions on your history, or directly at the border for visa-exempt travellers. That is the airport scenario nobody wants to live through: a refusal of entry after a transatlantic flight. Hence the value of dealing with the question before booking, in the logic I describe for the visitor visa and eTA.
For a study or work permit, the background review is part of processing the application, with the police certificate among the usual documents. An unresolved inadmissibility blocks the permit, whatever the rest of the file: the most solid job offer in the world does not offset an untreated history.
For permanent residence, the stakes are even more structural: the admissibility of everyone included in the application is examined, and the situation of a family member can affect the whole file in some configurations. Anyone considering a permanent residence application with a history, even an old one, is better off getting their situation clarified before creating a profile and committing fees, rather than discovering the problem at the review stage.
In every case, the timing logic is the same: the substantive processes, rehabilitation or record suspension, are counted in months or years. The earlier they start relative to the project, the better the project's chances of keeping its intended schedule.
Frequently asked questions
Can I enter Canada with a criminal record?
It depends on the offence, its equivalent in the Canadian Criminal Code, the time elapsed and the steps taken. Some minor offences stop blocking entry after a period, through deemed rehabilitation; others require individual rehabilitation requested from IRCC, or a record suspension if the conviction is Canadian. In the meantime, a temporary resident permit can allow a stay if the purpose outweighs the risk. The only reliable answer for your case goes through the equivalency analysis of your offence, ideally conducted by a professional.
Does a drunk driving conviction really block entry to Canada?
Yes, and it is the case that surprises people most. Since the 2018 tightening, impaired driving is classified as serious criminality, its Canadian equivalent being punishable by ten years. A single conviction, even an old one, even punished with a simple fine in your country, can be enough to make you inadmissible. Automatic deemed rehabilitation is not available for serious criminality: an active process is required, individual rehabilitation if the timelines allow, or a temporary resident permit for an immediate need.
What is deemed rehabilitation and when does it apply?
It is the automatic effect of time provided by law for the least serious offences: after a certain period following the complete serving of the sentence, the person is considered rehabilitated, with no application and no fee. It applies neither to serious criminality nor to every multiple-offence configuration, and it is the officer who assesses its conditions at the border. Many travellers have a documented legal opinion prepared to present if questioned, to avoid any improvised equivalency debate at the booth.
How long does an individual rehabilitation application take?
IRCC warns that processing can exceed a year, and the application itself is only receivable if at least five years have passed since the complete end of the sentence and since the acts. Add the time needed to gather court decisions, proof the sentence was served and certified translations, often several weeks or months. Anyone whose project has a deadline must therefore start very early, and consider a temporary resident permit in parallel for interim travel needs.
Is the temporary resident permit hard to get?
It is a discretionary decision: the officer weighs the purpose of your stay against the risk your file represents. A precise, documented purpose, old facts with no reoffending, irreproachable conduct since and solid guarantees of return make the difference. The maximum duration is three years, and there is no appeal against a refusal: the only useful follow-up is a new, better-built file. The TRP does not settle the merits, the inadmissibility remains; that is why it is often combined with a rehabilitation application run in parallel.
Do I have to declare an old conviction in my visa application?
Yes, always, when the question is asked. Concealing a conviction in the hope it will not surface exposes you to a misrepresentation finding, which carries its own multi-year inadmissibility, adding to the initial problem and complicating every future application. Canadian authorities have access to many foreign databases. A declared, explained and documented history can be handled through the prescribed routes; a concealed one turns a manageable file into a gravely compromised one.
Official sources
The Canada.ca section on inadmissibility explains the grounds, rehabilitation and the temporary resident permit: https://www.canada.ca/en/immigration-refugees-citizenship/services/immigrate-canada/inadmissibility.html. Fees are verified on IRCC's official fee list, the only up-to-date reference. For a record suspension after a conviction in Canada, the reference is the Parole Board of Canada. For a real file, beyond information, get support from an immigration lawyer or a regulated consultant.