Kourouma v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2003 FC 830

Date: 20030704

Docket: IMM-4123-02

Citation: 2003 FC 830

Montréal, Quebec, July 4, 2003

Present: The Honourable Mr. Justice Lemieux

BETWEEN:

ANDRÉE KOUROUMA

Plaintiff

and

THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

AND IMMIGRATION

Defendant

REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER

[1]                 Andrée Kourouma ("the plaintiff"), a citizen of Guinea, is asking the Court by this application for judicial review to set aside the decision on August 8, 2002, by the Refugee Protection Division ("the tribunal"), which did not believe her story of marital violence, stating as follows:

[TRANSLATION]

The tribunal thus cannot believe the principal plaintiff's story is authentic because there was a general lack of credibility. That being so, the tribunal concludes that the principal plaintiff did not discharge the burden of proof upon her.

[2]                 Counsel for the plaintiff argued that the tribunal erred in law in its assessment of credibility. The tribunal could not disregard the plaintiff's testimony and concentrate on secondary aspects of her account (the circumstances of her stay in the U.S. in 1999, her application for a Canadian visa in 2001 and the fact that she did not make a claim in the U.S.), with the result that the tribunal did not really consider her fear of persecution - the violence which she suffered at the hands of her husband.

[3]                 The interpretation which the plaintiff gave the tribunal's decision seems incorrect to me. The tribunal discussed several contradictions, lies, inconsistencies, improbabilities and omissions in its analysis of the plaintiff's case and in her testimony.

[4]                 Each of the points which adversely affected the plaintiff's credibility had to do with her conduct - her lack of a subjective fear - and went to the heart of her claim - her husband as a persecutor. A few examples will suffice.

[5]                 If the plaintiff really feared her husband and fled from him in 1999, why did she indicate that if a COSTCO card was lost they should contact her husband, and in her Canadian visa application give her husband's brother's name as a reference?

[6]                 In support of her Canadian visa application, the Permanent Mission of the Republic of Guinea to the United Nations in New York on August 14, 2001, sent a letter to the Canadian Consulate General asking it to grant a multiple visa for several entries and exits to the plaintiff, [TRANSLATION] "the wife of the Guinea consul in Morocco". On this point, the tribunal concluded:

[TRANSLATION]

                 The tribunal rejects these allegations and explanations, which it does not consider to be credible, because it is unlikely that the Guinea Permanent Mission could have written a letter in 2001 stating that the principal plaintiff was "the wife of the Guinea consul in Morocco", as according to what she said her husband had ceased to be consul in Morocco since 1996.

                 The evidence clearly showed that she was not speaking the truth and was trying to adjust her testimony.

[7]                 Why did she return to Guinea in 1999 when she was in the U.S. and fleeing from her husband?

[8]                 These and other examples that can be found from reading the transcript indicate that the tribunal, which was the judge of fact, could conclude that the plaintiff had not discharged the burden of proof upon her, and that:

[TRANSLATION]

Since she was not found to be credible, the tribunal considers that the principal plaintiff is not in danger of any threat to her life nor of any risk of cruel and unusual treatment or punishment.

ORDER

This application for judicial review is dismissed. No question of importance was raised.

Certified true translation

Suzanne M. Gauthier, C. Tr., LL.L.

                                                                 FEDERAL COURT

                                                          SOLICITORS OF RECORD

FILE:                                                                               IMM-4123-02

STYLE OF CAUSE:                                                     ANDRÉE KOUROUMA

Plaintiff

and

THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

Defendant

PLACE OF HEARING:                                                Montréal, Quebec

DATE OF HEARING:                                                  July 3, 2003

REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER:              Lemieux J.

DATE OF REASONS:                                                  July 4, 2003

APPEARANCES:

Stewart Istvanffy                                                                FOR THE PLAINTIFF

Andrea Shahin                                                                  FOR THE DEFENDANT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Stewart Istvanffy                                                                FOR THE PLAINTIFF

Montréal, Quebec

Morris Rosenberg                                                              FOR THE DEFENDANT

Deputy Attorney General of Canada

Montréal, Quebec