Date:
20130121
Docket:
IMM-4582-12
Citation:
2013 FC 52
[UNREVISED
ENGLISH CERTIFIED TRANSLATION]
Montréal, Quebec,
January 21, 2013
PRESENT: The
Honourable Mr. Justice Shore
BETWEEN:
|
|
MARTIN TORRES
VILLANUEVA
BLANCA INES ARELLANO
ROJAS
|
|
|
|
Applicants
|
|
and
|
|
|
THE MINISTER OF
CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
|
|
|
|
Respondent
|
|
|
|
|
REASONS
FOR JUDGMENT AND JUDGMENT
[1]
When
a narrative in its entirety lacks inherent logic and is not consistent, unravelling
the crux of such an account leads to a finding of lack of credibility; and, the
hopes of reassembling the account becomes a mere illusion of the applicant
accompanied by a cacophony of the applicant’s refrains. Furthermore, the
applicant, by his own non-credible account, becomes the author of the
incoherent account at the very heart of the decision rendered in his case. (See
Bernal v Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), at paragraph
23: “The RPD was entitled to rely on Ms. Ramirez Bernal’s conduct to make
findings regarding the genuineness of her fear (Sanchez v. Canada
(Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2006 FC 648, 149 A.C.W.S. (3d)
307 at paragraph 11).”)
[2]
This
decision is in response to the application for judicial review of a decision by
the Refugee Protection Division (RPD) of the Immigration and Refugee Board
(IRB) dated April 23, 2012.
[3]
The
principal applicant alleges that he fears a man and a woman, two members of a
criminal organization, after he refused to cooperate with them and experienced
extortion, death threats and false criminal accusations. A used car
salesperson, the principal applicant was confronted by buyers who wanted to
purchase a car with a cheque. After the principal applicant did not accept the cheque
transaction, the two members of the criminal organization threatened him and
eventually made misrepresentations with the police accusing the principal
applicant of sexual touching against the female persecutor and assault against
the male persecutor.
[4]
Despite
obvious errors regarding the beginning of the account and clerical errors in
reading the IRB decision as a whole, the RPD demonstrated understanding in its analysis
of the principal applicant’s account.
[5]
In
addition to major gaps, the principal applicant’s account lacks inherent logic
and contains several fatal contradictions.
[6]
The
Court, in analyzing the record, realized that the IRB’s errors are not
determinative given the major contradictions and implausibilities raised by the
RPD with respect to the applicants (Ibis v MCI, IMM-788-00).
[7]
Furthermore,
the applicants’ conduct significantly contradicts the main facts of their own
account:
a. In
the beginning, they did not want to file a complaint with the authorities because
of a lack of trust towards the authorities, but they nevertheless eventually
filed a complaint;
b. They
did not want to be seen in public because they were scared, but they nevertheless
celebrated their wedding openly;
c. There
are significant contradictions in the circumstances of the applicants’ wedding
and their reasons for coming to Canada, by first obtaining a tourist visa, which
lead to a lack of logic inherent in their primary account.
[8]
Despite
the IRB’s superficial errors, there are still significant contradictions and
gaps in the applicants’ account; and, even if the summary of the narrative were
corrected by the RPD, a new hearing would not change the fact that the
applicants’ account, as examined by the Court, lacks a basis of authenticity
and plausibility. In conclusion, the Court finds that, even if the matter were referred
back to the IRB for redetermination, there is no hope for a different outcome
given the lack of consistency and the significant contradictions; there is an
underlying lack of credibility by the applicants (Mobil Oil Canada Ltd. v
Canada-Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Board, [1994] 1 S.C.R. 202 at paragraph
53).
[9]
For
all of these reasons, the applicants’ application for judicial review is
dismissed.
JUDGMENT
THE
COURT ORDERS that the applicants’ application for judicial review
be dismissed. There is no question of general importance to certify.
“Michel M.J. Shore”
Certified
true translation
Janine
Anderson, Translator
Email this Content