Date: 20001205
Docket: IMM-6233-99
Ottawa, Ontario, December 5, 2000
Before: Pinard J.
Between:
LAURENT KOULADOUMNGAR
Plaintiff
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Defendant
ORDER
The application for judicial review of the decision by the Refugee Division on November 12, 1999, that the plaintiff is not a Convention refugee, is dismissed.
JUDGE
Certified true translation
Suzanne M. Gauthier, LL.L. Trad. a.
Date: 20001205
Docket: IMM-6233-99
Between:
LAURENT KOULADOUMNGAR
Plaintiff
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Defendant
REASONS FOR ORDER
PINARD J.
[1] The application for judicial review is from a decision by the Refugee Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board ("the RD") on November 12, 1999 that the plaintiff is not a Convention refugee as defined in s. 2(1) of the Immigration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-2.
[2] The plaintiff is a national of Chad and is 27 years old. He alleged that he had a well-founded fear of persecution if he returned to his country on account of his political opinions, ethnic origin (Sara) and religion (Christian).
[3] The RD refused to grant the plaintiff refugee status because he lacked credibility. It cited inter alia the following contradictions and improbabilities in support of this finding:
– the RD noted that in his Personal Information Form (PIF), the plaintiff told his story in the form of a socio-political essay, giving more about the situation in Chad than his personal experiences: it appeared to determine that this approach was more like a socio-political essay than events experienced;
– in his testimony the plaintiff indicated that the executive office of the Association jeunesse anti-clivage (AJAC) had 11 members and he could list the titles of each of the 11 positions without an error; however, he contradicted himself on an important point about the duties of those 11 members with whom he was allegedly associated for several years;
– when the RD tried to determine the plaintiff's exact function in the AJAC he was vague and imprecise: he repeated several times [TRANSLATION] "Everything depended on me", but was unable to explain why; as the executive included a president, a vice-president and a general secretary, the RD found it unlikely that everything would depend simply on a spokesperson;
– the RD also found it very unlikely that only the plaintiff would have been targeted by the authorities when the entire executive is still in Chad, without having been bothered or apprehended;
– the plaintiff said the third time he was stopped was at 6:00 a.m. and that he was held for three hours: in his PIF he indicated that a large group of non-governmental Christian bodies, members of the legislature and AJAC militants finally succeeded in obtaining his release after three hours; the RD found it unlikely that so many persons were contacted and mobilized so quickly at that early hour;
– the RD noted that ethnic origin and religion were not mentioned in the testimony: when it asked the plaintiff what he feared, he answered that he feared being arrested and killed; he also indicated that if he returned he would be morally obliged to go back to his duties with the AJAC; however, the RD noted that he could in fact leave the AJAC, since he has now come to Canada; finally, the plaintiff cited several petitions, but the RD saw no trace of these.
[4] As we know, in questions of credibility and the assessment of facts it is not this Court's function to substitute itself for a specialized tribunal like the RD when, as in the case at bar, the person claiming refugee status fails to show that the decision a quo is based on an erroneous finding of fact made in a perverse or capricious manner or without regard for the material available. It appears to the Court in general, after reviewing the evidence, that the inferences drawn by the panel could reasonably have been drawn (see Aguebor v. Canada (M.E.I.), 160 N.R. 315 (F.C. Appeal)).
[5] As the Refugee Division's view that the plaintiff was not credible amounts in fact, in the particular circumstances of the case at bar, to a finding that there was no credible basis to justify his claim for refugee status (see Sheikh v. Canada (M.E.I.), [1990] 3 F.C. 238, at 244), the application for judicial review must be dismissed.
YVON PINARD
JUDGE
OTTAWA, ONTARIO
December 5, 2000
Certified true translation
Suzanne M. Gauthier, LL.L. Trad. a.
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
COURT No.: IMM-6233-99
STYLE OF CAUSE: LAURENT KOULADOUMNGAR
v.
MCI
PLACE OF HEARING: MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC
DATE OF HEARING: OCTOBER 24, 2000
REASONS FOR ORDER BY: PINARD J.
DATED: DECEMBER 5, 2000
APPEARANCES:
MARIO BLANCHARD FOR THE APPLICANT
CAROLINE DOYON FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
MARIO BLANCHARD FOR THE APPLICANT
Montréal, Quebec
Morris Rosenberg FOR THE RESPONDENT
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Email this Content