Date: 19981026
Docket: IMM-3305-97
BETWEEN:
MAY NASSER,
Applicant,
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION,
Respondent.
REASONS FOR ORDER
WETSTON, J.
[1] The applicant, a citizen of Lebanon, seeks judicial review of a decision of the Convention Refugee Determination Division (the "Board") in which the Board determined that the applicant is not a Convention refugee. The applicant is a journalist who fears persecution by the Hezbollah if she returns to Lebanon.
[2] The Board issued its decision on July 11, 1997. The Board found that there was no credible evidence upon which to base a determination that the claimant is a Convention refugee. The Board stated that the following factors led it to this conclusion: the demeanour of the claimant as a witness; contradictions and inconsistencies in the evidence; conduct inconsistent with a well-founded fear of persecution; and implausibilities in the evidence.
[3] In a very efficient and comprehensive manner, applicant's counsel addressed these four matters. The applicant submits that the Board erred in finding the applicant's demeanour to be unsatisfactory, arguing that the Board ignored the totality of evidence given by the applicant. The applicant submits that her answers in testimony were unresponsive at certain points because she had already answered some of the questions which the Board put to her.
[4] Second, the applicant submits that she misunderstood the simplicity of the Board's question regarding the Hezbollah. She submits that the Board erred in interpreting her response and in searching for minute inconsistencies in her testimony. Furthermore, the applicant submits that the Board erred in assuming that the applicant had an obligation to assert details of her claim at the port of entry when the applicant had, in fact, been advised not to give details of her claim at that time but to include them in her PIF. In particular the applicant did not mention fear of the Hezbollah. The applicant submits that because she was being interviewed in an unfamiliar country without assistance, she was apprehensive and reticent to speak openly of matters which caused her great fear.
[5] Third, the applicant submits that the Board erred in finding the applicant's actions inconsistent with a well-founded fear. The applicant submits that the Board ignored the applicant's evidence in its totality and misinterpreted her evidence on this point. The applicant submits that it was her evidence that she had no opportunity to leave Lebanon earlier than she did. The applicant submits that the Board should have given her notice that this was an issue of concern and that the issue should have been discussed in the course of the hearing. The applicant submits that the Board ignored her evidence regarding her failure to make a refugee claim in the U.S.
[6] The applicant also alleges that the Board erred regarding a finding with respect to a bearded person at the point of entry. The applicant submits that her evidence regarding the actions of the Hezbollah is supported by documentary evidence. The applicant submits that the Board's finding of implausibility on this point is perverse.
[7] In my opinion, there is no basis to set aside the Board's decision. I agree with applicant's counsel that the Board erred in its finding with respect to the applicant's description of the bearded person she encountered at immigration at her port of entry. While I understand how the Board could have made such an error, I do not understand the need for the Board's additional comments regarding operatives and other matters. The Board's further comment regarding the applicant's explanation on this point was also unnecessary. However, I do not agree that the decision was based on this erroneous finding of fact.
[8] With respect to the other matters in issue, on the totality of the evidence, I accept the submissions of the respondent and, as such, I see no basis for the Court's intervention in this matter.
[9] Accordingly, this application is dismissed. There is no question for certification.
(Sgd.) "Howard I. Wetston"
Judge
Vancouver, British Columbia
October 26, 1998
FEDERAL COURT TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
HEARING DATED: October 15, 1998
COURT NO.: IMM-3305-97
STYLE OF CAUSE: MAY NASSER
v.
MCI
PLACE OF HEARING: Toronto, ON
REASONS FOR ORDER OF WETSTON, J.
dated October 26, 1998
APPEARANCES:
Ms. Linda Martschenko for Applicant
Mr. David Tyndale for Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Linda Martschenko Law Firm
Windsor, ON for Applicant
Morris Rosenberg for Respondent
Deputy Attorney General
of Canada
Email this Content