Khatun v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2005 FC 1043

Docket: IMM-6077-04

Citation: 2005 FC 1043

OTTAWA, Ontario, July 28, 2005

BETWEEN:

MASAMMAT MONOWARA KHATUN

Applicant

and

THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

Respondent

REASONS FOR ORDER

PHELAN J.

[1]         The Applicant is a female citizen of Bangladesh who, at the time of her application for refugee protection, was a permanent resident of Italy. She claimed that she was abused by her husband.

[2]         The Applicant had lived in Italy with her husband from 1992 to 2000 except for approximately eleven months when she returned to Bangladesh. She came to Canada in June 2002.

[3]         The Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board ("RPD") rejected her claim for refugee status and for protection. The "RPD" found that she was excluded under Article 1(E) of the Convention because she was a permanent resident of Italy where she had the rights and obligations attached to Italian nationality. The RPD also held that she had not rebutted the presumption of state protection in Italy. It also held that she had failed to establish serious harm if she were returned to Bangladesh.

[4]         The real problem for the Applicant is that she has let her Italian permanent resident permit lapse. The only way she can secure another permit is through her husband's status - the person from whom she is allegedly escaping. Therefore there is a real likelihood of her being returned to Bangladesh.

[5]         I concur with the RPD's conclusion that she is excluded from Convention protection because at the time of filing her claim she had nationality status in Italy. That she allowed that status to lapse subsequent to her claim is a difficulty which she created and is not a basis on which to overturn the RPD's conclusion.

[6]         The Applicant never sought state protection in Italy. She never sought refugee protection in Italy or in Spain -to which she travelled frequently. I can find no basis on which to overturn the RPD's findings on state protection.

[7]         Finally, as to returning to Bangladesh, the RPD noted the significant re-availment by the Applicant, indicating a lack of a well-founded fear upon return to that country. The RPD's finding is more than reasonable.

[8]         Therefore this application for judicial review will be dismissed. No question will be certified.