Date: 20091006
Docket: IMM-838-09
Citation: 2009
FC 1010
Toronto, Ontario, October 6, 2009
PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Campbell
BETWEEN:
TENZIN
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1]
The Applicant is a
Tibetan citizen from China. The present Application concerns a
challenge by a Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (PRRA) Officer who found that the
Applicant would not be at risk if he were returned to China.
[2]
A panel of the
Refugee Protection Division (RPD) refused the Applicant’s refugee claim on the
basis that he failed to provide sufficient credible evidence as to his identity
as a Tibetan citizen. With respect to his PRRA application, the Applicant
tendered new evidence that supports his claim as a Tibetan. He advanced two
affidavits from individuals who deposed that he is Tibetan, and, in addition,
he provided the PRRA officer with a letter from the Canadian Tibetan
Association of Ontario which states as follows:
This is to certify that holder of Tibetan
Green book number 12464 is Mr. Tenzin. As per his Tibetan Green book,
the official Tibetan identity proves that he is a bona-fide Tibetan.
He
is an active member and also volunteers during the activities of Canadian
Tibetan Association of Ontario, www.ctao.org.
[Emphasis in original]
(Tribunal Record, p. 34)
[3]
Faced with the new
evidence, the PRRA Officer issued a decision which included the following
reasons:
This
new evidence does not provide reasonable grounds to believe that he has
attracted the attention of Chinese authorities in Canada, or that he is from China, or needs fear [sic] Chinese
authorities.
[…]
The
applicant has submitted a letter from The Canadian Tibetan Association of Ontario
certifying that the holder of Tibetan Green Book, number 12464, is Mr. Tenzin.
The letter states the Tibetan identity proves that the applicant is a bona-fide
Tibetan. […] The applicant does not state whether the Canadian Tibetan
Association of Ontario determined the authenticity of his Green Book.
Documentary evidence indicates that there is a process for determining the
authenticity of a Green Book. “According to a representative of the Officer of
Tibet in New York, the authenticity of a Green Book can be verified by the
Tibetan office or association that issued the document (20 Apr. 2006).”
[…]
[…]
the documents in question here were available to the Board, […] and the issue
appears not to have been raised there. Therefore, the current submission is
really a request for a re-evaluation of the evidence weighed and found wanting
by the Board, the Tribunal which did have the resources at hand to investigate
it.
(Tribunal
Record, pp. 9-10)
[4]
There is no dispute
that all evidence with respect to identity must be considered in reaching a
conclusion on a PRRA application. The most cogent piece of evidence that was
not before the RPD is the letter from the Canadian Tibetan Association of
Ontario authenticating the Green Book. In my opinion, given this new evidence,
the PRRA Officer was required to properly evaluate the authenticity of the
Green Book because it speaks to the identity of the Applicant. Because the
Officer did not meet this requirement, I find the PRRA decision was rendered in
reviewable error.
ORDER
Accordingly,
I set the aside the decision under review and refer the matter back to a
different PRRA officer for re-determination.
There is no question to
certify.
“Douglas
R. Campbell”
Email this Content