IMM-1621-96
BETWEEN:
NIKA NZINGA,
Applicant,
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION,
Respondent.
REASONS FOR
ORDER
TREMBLAY-LAMER J.
This is an application for
judicial review brought by the applicant, Nika Nzinga, against a decision of
the Convention Refugee Determination Division (the Refugee Division) of the
Immigration and Refugee Board, which held that the applicant was not a
Convention refugee.
1. The facts
The applicant was born on July
27, 1960 at Kinshasa, Zaire. In 1991, she obtained the position of secretary
to the chief executive officer of the Compagnie Maritime Zaïroise (C.M.Z.), who
was an active member of the Christian social democratic party (C.S.D.P.).
Members of this party are opposed to the regime of President Mobutu. Given her
employer's involvement in this party, the applicant agreed to work for it as a
volunteer. She typed up and photocopied documents required for the party's
activities.
In 1994, her employer allegedly
blocked the appointment of the brother of the Minister of State Supervision as
director-general of a maritime agency, AMIZA. On November 18, 1994, the
applicant received a visit at her employer's office from three men demanding
her co-operation in obtaining some documents. They returned three days later,
this time with specific demands. They wanted her employer's daybook, the names
of his visitors, and copies of certain confidential documents. A week later,
they returned, at which time the applicant indicated to them that she could not
provide copies of these documents, since she did not have them in her possession.
The men left, threatening reprisals for her refusal to co-operate. On December
7, 1994, they turned up at her residence. Her parents were pushed around and
threatened. From that moment on, the applicant realized that her safety, and
even her life, was in jeopardy. She sought refuge with an uncle, who assisted
her in leaving Zaire, which she did on January 9, 1995. She arrived in Canada
on January 16, 1995, and immediately claimed refugee status.
The Refugee Division did not
question the applicant's credibility, but concluded that, given the absence of
a link between the alleged fear and one of the grounds of persecution set out
in the definition of "Convention refugee" and the absence of an
objective fear of persecution, the applicant had not discharged her burden of
proving a reasonable fear of persecution.
The evidence shows that the
applicant was not a member of the C.S.D.P. In her personal information form
(P.I.F.), she indicates that, from time to time, as secretary of the chief
executive officer, she looked after photocopying or typing for party meetings.
She admits that she never attended a meeting of the C.S.D.P. The Refugee
Division found that her evidence was not sufficient to support her allegation
that political opinions had been attributed to her. I cannot find this
conclusion unreasonable. It was open to the Refugee Division to reach such a
conclusion, since it is based on the evidence presented. Moreover, the
documentary evidence reinforces such a conclusion, because the applicant, as a
secretary, does not meet the profile of targeted figures, that is, leaders and
key members of political parties, journalists and so on.
As for the conclusion reached by
the tribunal from the documentary evidence, that the problems of the applicant
were linked to the fact that she was the secretary of an important man involved
in a problem of unauthorized spending, once again this was justified. Although
the applicant has given a different interpretation of the facts submitted, the
Refugee Division could, as a specialized tribunal, assess the content of the
evidence and draw a different conclusion than the applicant. In fact, the
documentary evidence indicates that Prime Minister Kango Wa Dondo wanted to
transform the enterprises in this portfolio, by restructuring, privatization,
or liquidation. The applicant's employer was involved in a scandal involving
patronage and unauthorized spending. It was, therefore, plausible to believe
that the applicant's problems were related to this, particularly since the
documents the authorities were seeking were her employer's daybook and other
documents of his.
As for the objective fear of
persecution, the Refugee Division has judged that the applicant's cessation of
her secretarial duties and her employer's suspension removed all grounds for
this. This conclusion was reasonable, because the applicant's fears were
linked to her secretarial duties.
In short, nothing in this
decision allows me to intervene, because the conclusions were not made in a perverse
or capricious manner or without regard for the evidence.
Accordingly, the application for
judicial review is dismissed.
OTTAWA, Ontario
The 27th day of March 1997
Danièle
Tremblay-Lamer
JUDGE
Certified true translation
Audra Poirier
FEDERAL COURT
OF CANADA
TRIAL
DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
COURT
FILE NO:IMM-1621-96
STYLE
OF CAUSE:NIKA NZINGA v.
THE
MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
PLACE
OF HEARING:MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC
DATE
OF HEARING:MARCH 25, 1997
REASONS
FOR ORDER BY:TREMBLAY-LAMER J.
DATED:MARCH
27, 1997
APPEARANCES:
ADÈLE
MARDOCHEFOR THE APPLICANT
LISA
MAZIADEFOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
ADÈLE MARDOCHE
MONTRÉAL,
QUEBECFOR THE APPLICANT
GEORGE
THOMSONFOR THE RESPONDENT
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL
OF CANADA
Email this Content