Date: 20050222
Docket: IMM-9777-03
Citation: 2005 FC 268
Ottawa, Ontario, this 22nd day of February, 2005
Present: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE von FINCKENSTEIN
BETWEEN:
LEKAN AKINOSHO
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1] The Applicant is a 39-year-old male citizen of Nigeria. He claims refugee protection in Canada based on his activities in Nigeria as a journalist, author and a human activist. He claims that he fears persecution from members of the Oodua People's Congress (OPC) who allegedly collaborate with the Nigerian police.
[2] The Applicant's political involvement dates back to his student years at the University of Ibadan, where he was active in the student movement and acted as a Public Relations Officer for the Student Union (1988 - 1989) and the chief mobilization officer for the National Association of Nigerian Students. The Applicant states that he was arrested for the first time in 1989 for participating in an anti-government demonstration. After he completed university, the Applicant became involved in organizations such as the Civil Liberties Organization, the Committee for the Defence of Human Rights (CDHR) and the Campaign for Democracy and Constitutional Rights Project. As a result of these activities the Applicant was arrested for eight days and subsequently targeted by OPC militants.
[3] In 1999 the Applicant was seriously injured in an attack by OPC militants and had to spend five days in hospital. When he reported the incident to the Mushin police station, the police did not offer to help him and, in fact, threatened to arrest him as a human rights activist. Not able to obtain police protection, the Applicant relocated to another part of Lagos.
[4] Toward the beginning of 2001, the Applicant states the crisis between the OPC and the Hausa erupted in Lagos. During this period, over a thousand people were killed and the government declared a curfew. The Applicant claims that he was beaten and threatened when he distributed leaflets calling on people to renounce the violence. When he reported this incident to the police, the Applicant states that instead of getting protection, he was arrested as soon as he introduced himself as a human rights activist. With the intervention of a lawyer, the Applicant states that he was released on bail.
[5] The Applicant's situation allegedly became more dangerous when one of his neighbours, a leader of the militia, started hosting militia meetings under police protection in his home. The Applicant states that, nightly, he met police and OPC militants at checkpoints and was intimidated by them. Feeling threatened, the Applicant obtained a visa to the United States where he arrived on December 7, 2001. He stayed in the United States until January 26, 2002, when he came to Canada and asked for protection.
[6] The Board rejected the claim finding that the Applicant was not credible in respect of
his contentions. The Board gave a lengthy list of reasons for its findings, including inter alia,
that it was not convinced that:
a) the Applicant was a journalist,
b) the Applicant played an active role in the CDHR, and
c) his scars, admittedly caused by a motor cycle accident, had been aggravated by beatings with an iron rod by his persecutors.
The Board also refused to accept his explanations regarding:
a) the events occurring at Ketu Mile 12 market,
b) the delay in leaving Nigeria once he had a visa, and
c) his failure to seek refugee status in the United States.
ISSUE
Did the Board err in its credibility findings?
STANDARD OF REVIEW
[7] From Singh v. Canada ( M.C.I.), [1999] F.C.J. No 1283 it is clear that patent unreasonableness is the applicable standard of review.
ANALYSIS
[8] The Applicant argues that the Board's findings of lack of credibility are not sustainable because it ignored evidence and failed to accept his explanations. Herewith, the main findings of the Board and the Applicant's contentions:
Being a journalist
The Board found that the Applicant did not prove his status as a journalist as he could not produce any articles he had allegedly written nor did he have a press identity card. His explanations were a) that his brother had not sent him any articles and that he could not access them from Canada and b) that his press card had expired and carrying an expired card was against Nigerian law. No evidence of Nigerian law to that effect was produced.
Active role in the CDHR
The Applicant claimed he was a founding member of the CDHR, was a member of the editorial committee of its newsletter and wrote several articles for the publication. The Board found his membership card was dated 1996 while the CDHR was founded in 1987 and his PIF suggested he joined in 1992. Secondly, the newsletter did not indicate there was an editorial committee and its articles were unsigned, accordingly there was no way of verifying his claim. Although claiming to know well the current and past presidents of the CDHR, no letter or other evidence from either a president or the organisation was presented. The Applicant contends that the Board was mixed up and that he explained that he was a founding member and only became an active participant in 1992.
Reasons for his scars
In his CIC intake interview on February 22, 2003, the Applicant indicated he had scars under his right eye and on his left arm, the latter a result of a motor cycle accident. In his PIF of February 27, 2002, he attributed these scars to attacks by the OPC in 1999. At the hearing he argued that he was tortured and the original motor scars where further aggravated through beatings with an iron rod. He also produced a medical certificate to that effect. The Board found the certificate "peculiar" and of little credibility.
Ketu Mile 12 market
A massacre of a large number of people, between 500 and 1000, took place at Ketu 12 Mile market in November 1999. The Applicant had testified that he was arrested for distributing leaflets asking for an end to violence triggered by the Ketu 12 Mile market riots in January 2001.
He could not explain the discrepancy in dates and testified that other riots took place in Lagos in 2002. The Board admitted that indeed other ethnic riots took place but none on the scale of 500 dead as the Applicant alleged in his testimony. No record of such large scale riots can be found in either the Department of State report or IRB 2003 country assessment for Nigeria.
Delay in leaving Nigeria
The Applicant obtained a visa for the United States in August of 2003 but did not leave until December. He claims it took that long to get a cheque issued by the University for his royalties on his book owed to him. He claims not to have sought refuge in the United States because Canada has a better human rights record and is a liberal country compared to the United States. The Board found these explanations unsatisfactory.
[9] Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Board is immaterial and besides the point. The issue for this Court to decide is whether there was anything patently unreasonable in the Board's findings. Its findings are based on reasonable interpretations of the evidence and assessment of the explanations offered by the Applicant. After all, it has long been established that the Board is the best judge of credibility. As stated in Aguebour v. Canada (M.E.I.), [1993] F.C. No. 732:
There is no longer any doubt that the Refugee Division, which is a specialized tribunal, has complete jurisdiction to determine the plausibility of testimony: who is in a better position than the Refugee Division to gauge the credibility of an account and to draw the necessary inferences? As long as the inferences drawn by the tribunal are not so unreasonable as to warrant our intervention, its findings are not open to judicial review.
[1] The Board's finding regarding the medical evidence are consistent with existing jurisprudence (see Boateng v. Canada (M.C.I), [1995] F.C.J. No. 517) as are its findings regarding the delay (see Heer v. M.E.I., [1988] F.C.J. No. 330).
[2] Accordingly, I see no reason to reverse the decision of the Board.
ORDER
THIS COURT ORDERS that this application be dismissed.
"K. von Finckenstein"
Judge
FEDERAL COURT
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: IMM-9777-03
STYLE OF CAUSE: LEKAN AKINOSHO
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
DATE OF HEARING: FEBRUARY16, 2005
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER BY: von FINCKENSTEIN, J.
DATED: FEBRUARY 22, 2005
APPEARANCES BY:
Stella Iriah Anaele For the Applicant
Allison Phillips For the Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Stella Iriah Anaele
Toronto, Ontario For the Applicant
John H. Sims, Q.C.
Toronto, Ontario For the Respondent
Email this Content