Date: 20030130
Docket: IMM-875-02
Neutral citation: 2003 FCT 101
BETWEEN:
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Applicant
- and -
TAFARI RENNOCK
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1] This is an application for judicial review of the decision of the Convention
Refugee Determination Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (the "CRDD") dated January 22, 2002, wherein the CRDD determined that the Respondent is a Convention Refugee.
[2] The Respondent was born in Jamaica, and lived there for nine years, before
moving to the United States, where he lived as a permanent resident. He returned to Jamaica in 1999. While in Jamaica he resided with some friends of his family. He lived in Jamaica until June 2000, when he entered Canada as a visitor. He stayed until September 18, 2000, and then returned to Jamaica for the birth of his daughter.
[3] On October 5, 2000, while walking with two members of the family with whom
he was residing, the Applicant's group was shot at by unknown men. There is no evidence that the assailants were agents of the state. This attack was alleged to be motivated by political activities in which his friends were involved. The police were never contacted in relation to this attack. Following this attack, the Applicant left Jamaica and returned to Canada on October 8, 2000. The Respondent filed a refugee claim on July 5, 2001.
[4] The Respondent claims a well-founded fear of persecution on the basis of
membership in a particular social group, specifically, the family with which he resided in Jamaica, as well as imputed political opinion by virtue of his association with this family, who was known to have specific political views.
[5] The CRDD found that the Respondent to be a Convention refugee based on the
information he provided to them. The CRDD found that the family with whom he resided in Jamaica is a "surrogate family" to him and it is not unreasonable that he would be associated with the views known to be held by this family.
[6] The Applicant seeks to review this decision on numerous grounds. I am satisfied
that the central issue in this claim is whether the CRDD adequately addressed the issue of the availability of state protection. In my opinion, this issue is sufficient to dispose of the application, so I see no need to address the other issues.
[7] When assessing a Convention refugee claim, there is an obligation on
the CRDD to determine whether the claimant's home state is able to protect him or her from the source of persecution in those instances where the threat does not emanate from the state itself. (see Canada (Attorney General) v. Ward, [1993] 2 S.C.R. 689)
[8] In its reasons, the CRDD made no reference to the availability of state protection.
[10] In my opinion, the failure of the CRDD to consider the availability of state
protection constitutes a fundamental reviewable error.
ORDER
Accordingly, I would set aside the decision of the CRDD and refer the matter back for redetermination by a differently constituted panel.
"Douglas R. Campbell"
____________________________
J.F.C.C.
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
DOCKET: IMM-875-02
STYLE OF CAUSE: THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND
IMMIGRATION
Applicant
- and -
TAFARI RENNOCK
Respondent
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
DATE OF HEARING: THURSDAY, JANUARY 30, 2003
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER BY: CAMPBELL J.
DATED: THURSDAY, JANUARY 30, 2003
APPEARANCES BY: Mr. Brad Gotkin
For the Applicant
Mr. V. Charles Anipare
For the Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attoney General of Canada
For the Respondent
V. Charles Anipare
Barrister & Solicitor
45 Sheppard Avenue East, Suite 900
Toronto, Ontario
M2N 5W9
For the Respondent
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Date: 20020130
Docket: IMM-875-02
BETWEEN:
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND
IMMIGRATION
Applicant
- and -
TAFARI RESPONDENT
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER
Email this Content