Date: 19980903
Docket: IMM-4301-97
BETWEEN:
LI HUA HO
Applicant
-and-
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
DENAULT, J.:
[1] This is an application for judicial review of the determination by the Refugee Division that the applicant, a Chinese woman, was not a convention refugee.
[2] The applicant saw her refugee claim for fear of persecution because of sexual abuse by her employer dismissed because it lacked credibility.
[3] A labourer at a state owned factory, the applicant had to sleep in a dormitory with other women, even though she was married. A high ranking local member of the Communist party managed the factory. When he took advantage of his position to sexually abuse her, she denounced him to local officials but she was then accused of falsely defaming a Communist party official and ordered to sign a retractation. She was retained in a storage shed within the factory compound, to force her to give in. After a week of detention, her husband and a friend helped her to escape; she later flew to Canada.
[4] The tribunal found that the applicant's story was not credible because of inconsistencies and contradictions concerning the presence of guards at the tool shed where her employer was detaining her. It also found that the detention and escape scenario lacked plausibility.
[5] Having reviewed all of the evidence, specifically the testimony of the applicant, I have not been persuaded that the intervention of this Court is warranted.
[6] The interpreter may have misinterpreted the applicant, as counsel argues, when he had her say in the mandarin language that "a guard was guarding the door" when she would have stated that "there were guards somewhere outside" according to experts that listened to the tape recording of the applicant's hearing. But I am of the view that this minor error in interpretation, in less than ideal circumstances, 1 does not affect in any manner the various inconsistencies in the applicant's testimony, with respect to the presence of guards, which gave rise to the adverse finding of credibility.
[7] As to the lack of plausibility of the detention and escape scenario of the applicant, I am of the view that it was open to the tribunal to come to that conclusion. While I agree with counsel for the applicant that one must be careful in assessing the working conditions in China, as compared to ours, it remains that from the facts of this case, it was not unreasonable for the tribunal to conclude to a lack of plausibility in the applicant's testimony.
[8] For these reasons, this application will be dismissed. There is no serious issue of general importance to be certified.
"P. Denault"
Judge
September 3, 1998
Toronto, Ontario
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
COURT NO: IMM-4301-97
| STYLE OF CAUSE: LI HUA HO |
- and -
| THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION |
DATE OF HEARING: WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 2, 1998
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
REASONS FOR ORDER BY: DENAULT, J.
DATED: THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 1998
APPEARANCES:
Mr. Raoul Boulakia
For the Applicant
Ms. Geraldine MacDonald
For the Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Raoul Boulakia
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General
of Canada
For the Respondent
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Date: 19980903
Docket: IMM-4301-97
Between:
Applicant
- and -
| THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION |
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
__________________
1 See Baregas v. Canada (M.C.I.) Imm-2642-96, dated June 30, 1997, at parag. 7 where McGillis J. refers to Tran v. H.M.Q. [1994] 2 S.C.R. 951, at page 987.
Email this Content