Acceptance of Common Law Spouse for LTVP

[Bbbb5]

Came across this post on Xiao Hong Shu which really intrigued me on the issue so wanna check if anyone has any insight/experience to share? 
 

OP is a PRC national in China, his boyfriend here in SG. What are the chances for him to apply for long term visit pass as a dependant (as common law spouse)? I presume they’d travelled to countries where same sex marriage is recognised but not the country of citizenship/PR for either 😕 and given the social/political landscape here, what are the odds of getting the LTVP thru? 

[singalion]

Assuming both are male the reply is:

 

Zero! (Chances)

 

There are some few exeptions for same sex couples under a Dependant's pass , however in high earner or high profile cases (MD of bank, (ex) shareholder of a Silicon valley corporation, famous high net worth investment manager.) 

 

LTVP for same sex couples not granted. 

 

 

[GachiMuchi]

9 hours ago, Bbbb5 said:

Came across this post on Xiao Hong Shu which really intrigued me on the issue so wanna check if anyone has any insight/experience to share? 
 

OP is a PRC national in China, his boyfriend here in SG. What are the chances for him to apply for long term visit pass as a dependant (as common law spouse)? I presume they’d travelled to countries where same sex marriage is recognised but not the country of citizenship/PR for either 😕 and given the social/political landscape here, what are the odds of getting the LTVP thru? 

 

The situation you're describing involves a few complex legal and social factors, particularly because it pertains to same-sex relationships and the policies of Singapore regarding long-term visit passes (LTVP) for dependents.

 

Key Points to Consider:

1. Singapore's Legal Framework :

   • Singapore does not recognize same-sex marriage or civil unions. The country's laws are largely influenced by traditional values, and while there have been some progressive changes in recent years, same-sex relationships are not afforded the same legal recognition as heterosexual ones.
   • The Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) of Singapore issues LTVPs to certain categories of individuals, including spouses, common-law spouses, and other dependents. However, "common-law spouse" typically refers to heterosexual couples who have lived together for a significant period (usually at least 2 years) and can provide evidence of their cohabitation.

2. Same-Sex Relationships and LTVP :

   • As of now, Singapore does not grant LTVPs based on same-sex relationships, even if the couple has traveled to countries where same-sex marriage is recognized. The ICA's policy does not extend to recognizing same-sex partners as dependents for the purposes of granting an LTVP.
   • Even if the couple has entered into a same-sex marriage or civil partnership in a foreign jurisdiction, this would not be recognized under Singapore law, and therefore would not qualify the foreign partner for an LTVP as a dependent.

3. Social and Political Landscape :

   • While Singapore has made some strides in LGBTQ+ rights, such as the repeal of Section 377A (which criminalized sex between men), the government has also taken steps to reinforce the definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman. This includes constitutional amendments to prevent challenges to the current definition of marriage.
   • Public opinion on LGBTQ+ issues in Singapore is mixed, with some segments of society being more accepting, while others remain conservative. This social context influences the government's cautious approach to LGBTQ+ rights.

4. Alternative Options :

   • If the boyfriend wishes to stay in Singapore long-term, he may need to explore other avenues, such as securing employment and applying for an Employment Pass (EP) or S Pass, or pursuing education and obtaining a student visa.
   • Some couples in similar situations opt for one partner to establish themselves professionally or academically in Singapore, which allows them to reside in the country without relying on relationship-based visas.

5. Chances of Success :

   • Given the current legal and policy framework, the chances of successfully obtaining an LTVP as a dependent based on a same-sex relationship are extremely low. The ICA's guidelines do not accommodate same-sex partners, and there is no indication that this will change in the near future.

Conclusion:

Unfortunately, under the current legal and social landscape in Singapore, the odds of the OP's boyfriend obtaining an LTVP as a dependent (common-law spouse) are very slim. The best course of action would likely involve exploring alternative visa options that are not dependent on the nature of their relationship.

 

If the couple is deeply committed to living together in Singapore, they may need to consider other strategies, such as one partner finding employment or educational opportunities that would allow them to reside in the country legally. Additionally, staying informed about any potential changes in Singapore's policies regarding LGBTQ+ rights and immigration could be beneficial in the long term.

[Bbbb5]

7 hours ago, singalion said:

Assuming both are male the reply is:

 

Zero! (Chances)

 

There are some few exeptions for same sex couples under a Dependant's pass , however in high earner or high profile cases (MD of bank, (ex) shareholder of a Silicon valley corporation, famous high net worth investment manager.) 

 

LTVP for same sex couples not granted. 

 

 

So unless being he himself is “worthy” (can’t think of a better word) granting a visa to stay here, practically no way😅

[Bbbb5]

32 minutes ago, GachiMuchi said:

 

The situation you're describing involves a few complex legal and social factors, particularly because it pertains to same-sex relationships and the policies of Singapore regarding long-term visit passes (LTVP) for dependents.

 

Key Points to Consider:

1. Singapore's Legal Framework :

   • Singapore does not recognize same-sex marriage or civil unions. The country's laws are largely influenced by traditional values, and while there have been some progressive changes in recent years, same-sex relationships are not afforded the same legal recognition as heterosexual ones.
   • The Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) of Singapore issues LTVPs to certain categories of individuals, including spouses, common-law spouses, and other dependents. However, "common-law spouse" typically refers to heterosexual couples who have lived together for a significant period (usually at least 2 years) and can provide evidence of their cohabitation.

2. Same-Sex Relationships and LTVP :

   • As of now, Singapore does not grant LTVPs based on same-sex relationships, even if the couple has traveled to countries where same-sex marriage is recognized. The ICA's policy does not extend to recognizing same-sex partners as dependents for the purposes of granting an LTVP.
   • Even if the couple has entered into a same-sex marriage or civil partnership in a foreign jurisdiction, this would not be recognized under Singapore law, and therefore would not qualify the foreign partner for an LTVP as a dependent.

3. Social and Political Landscape :

   • While Singapore has made some strides in LGBTQ+ rights, such as the repeal of Section 377A (which criminalized sex between men), the government has also taken steps to reinforce the definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman. This includes constitutional amendments to prevent challenges to the current definition of marriage.
   • Public opinion on LGBTQ+ issues in Singapore is mixed, with some segments of society being more accepting, while others remain conservative. This social context influences the government's cautious approach to LGBTQ+ rights.

4. Alternative Options :

   • If the boyfriend wishes to stay in Singapore long-term, he may need to explore other avenues, such as securing employment and applying for an Employment Pass (EP) or S Pass, or pursuing education and obtaining a student visa.
   • Some couples in similar situations opt for one partner to establish themselves professionally or academically in Singapore, which allows them to reside in the country without relying on relationship-based visas.

5. Chances of Success :

   • Given the current legal and policy framework, the chances of successfully obtaining an LTVP as a dependent based on a same-sex relationship are extremely low. The ICA's guidelines do not accommodate same-sex partners, and there is no indication that this will change in the near future.

Conclusion:

Unfortunately, under the current legal and social landscape in Singapore, the odds of the OP's boyfriend obtaining an LTVP as a dependent (common-law spouse) are very slim. The best course of action would likely involve exploring alternative visa options that are not dependent on the nature of their relationship.

 

If the couple is deeply committed to living together in Singapore, they may need to consider other strategies, such as one partner finding employment or educational opportunities that would allow them to reside in the country legally. Additionally, staying informed about any potential changes in Singapore's policies regarding LGBTQ+ rights and immigration could be beneficial in the long term.

Wow! Thanks! very informative!

[egal]

i think even for hetero couple, the chance is zero

[radiusulnar]

The ICA website has clear guidance on the categories of persons LTVP is granted to. 

[mate69]

As far as Singapore is concerned, it's (almost) i believe close to impossible. The odds are greatly stacked against such a scenario

[singalion]

11 hours ago, Bbbb5 said:

So unless being he himself is “worthy” (can’t think of a better word) granting a visa to stay here, practically no way😅

 

The partner in Singapore must be a Singapore citizen or PR. If he is a foreigner himself (not having a PR), then not eligible for LTVP .

 

The only way to live here would be through an Employment Pass of the category EP (or higher), then under an Dependants Pass if none of them is a Singaporean or PR. S Pass Dependants Pass approvals are very rare. The employer of the S Pass holder must agree.

 

 

Edited February 25 by singalion

[cbm]

There's a cautionary tale that happened several years ago about a male doctor and his foreign boyfriend. Doctor helped the boyfriend to apply for employment pass based on false pretenses so that they can stay in Singapore together. The authorities found out. The doctor lost his job and was jailed. The boyfriend fled to his home country.

[singalion]

54 minutes ago, cbm said:

There's a cautionary tale that happened several years ago about a male doctor and his foreign boyfriend. Doctor helped the boyfriend to apply for employment pass based on false pretenses so that they can stay in Singapore together. The authorities found out. The doctor lost his job and was jailed. The boyfriend fled to his home country.

 

No need to make a big secret out of it as it has been widely covered in the local news/ it hasn't been a tale also but real:

 

It was not just some simple help of getting him a job in his medical clinic, elsewhere or fabricating some degrees by the doctor, but by a real cheat.

The issue was not so much on the "application of a pass" but the cheat with changed samples of blood for the HIV test, where the doctor gave his blood sample, instead of the one from the Employment pass applicant/ holder.

 

Doctor gets 2 years' jail for switching blood sample of HIV-positive boyfriend with his own

Nov 13, 2018

 

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/doctor-gets-2-years-jail-for-switching-blood-sample-of-hiv-positive-boyfriend

 

 

On the whole story was the best actually, that this Employment Pass holder had worked for 2 local Polytechnics as a lecturer nearly 5 years where the HR Managers at the local Polytechnics plus the MOE prior to hiring him never verified his credentials (Master’s degree in developmental and child psychology as well as a doctorate in psychology and education from the University of Paris). AND even better: The Employment Pass holder was screened by the Ministry of Education... without them also verifying the accuracy of his degrees... 

Quote: 

"The Education Ministry had conducted pre-employment checks on XX before he began teaching at polytechnics here, said Senior Parliamentary Secretary for Education Low Yen Ling in Parliament on Tuesday (26 Feb 2019).

Ms Low said that the ministry had verified copies of XX’s educational certificates against the original documents and he had demonstrated “a good grasp” of the subject during his job interviews." Quote End.

 

 

[Steve5380]

3 hours ago, singalion said:

 

No need to make a big secret out of it as it has been widely covered in the local news/ it hasn't been a tale also but real:

 

It was not just some simple help of getting him a job in his medical clinic, elsewhere or fabricating some degrees by the doctor, but by a real cheat.

The issue was not so much on the "application of a pass" but the cheat with changed samples of blood for the HIV test, where the doctor gave his blood sample, instead of the one from the Employment pass applicant/ holder.

 

Doctor gets 2 years' jail for switching blood sample of HIV-positive boyfriend with his own

Nov 13, 2018

 

https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/doctor-gets-2-years-jail-for-switching-blood-sample-of-hiv-positive-boyfriend

 

 

On the whole story was the best actually, that this Employment Pass holder had worked for 2 local Polytechnics as a lecturer nearly 5 years where the HR Managers at the local Polytechnics plus the MOE prior to hiring him never verified his credentials (Master’s degree in developmental and child psychology as well as a doctorate in psychology and education from the University of Paris). AND even better: The Employment Pass holder was screened by the Ministry of Education... without them also verifying the accuracy of his degrees... 

Quote: 

"The Education Ministry had conducted pre-employment checks on XX before he began teaching at polytechnics here, said Senior Parliamentary Secretary for Education Low Yen Ling in Parliament on Tuesday (26 Feb 2019).

Ms Low said that the ministry had verified copies of XX’s educational certificates against the original documents and he had demonstrated “a good grasp” of the subject during his job interviews." Quote End.

 

 

 

I don't find it difficult to be on the side of the doctor and his lover.  LOVE should be recognized as a primordial force that prevails over some governmental regulation. The "criminality" of the doctor should not justify two years in jail.  Some short jail sentence or probation should suffice.

 

The US would also reject applications for residence by individuals HIV positive in the past,  but this rejection was deleted.  This was years ago when America still had a democratic and somewhat benevolent government.  This has changed today with the new fascist government.