Docket: IMM-4394-17
Citation:
2018 FC 126
Vancouver, British Columbia, February 2, 2018
PRESENT: The Honourable Mr. Justice Zinn
|
BETWEEN:
|
|
ABBAS, KHAWAJA
HASSAN
|
|
Applicant
|
|
and
|
|
THE MINISTER OF
CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
and THE MINISTER OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS
|
|
Respondents
|
ORDER AND REASONS
[1]
Mr. Abbas seeks an order staying the execution
of his deportation to Pakistan scheduled for Sunday, February 4, 2018.
[2]
The decision that underlies this motion is a
negative Pre-Removal Risk Assessment [PRRA].
[3]
Mr. Abbas entered Canada with his family from
the U.S.A. on February 17, 2009, and made a claim for refugee status. In that
claim, he reported that he belonged to the Muhajir Qaumi Movement Altaf
Group [MQM-A]. As a result of that membership, on December 21, 2011, Mr. Abbas
was reported inadmissible to Canada for security reasons
under section 34 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001,
c 27 [IRPA] . On March 16, 2016, the Immigration Division issued a deportation
order against Mr. Abbas pursuant to paragraph 34(1)(f) of the Act [the
Deportation Order]. An application to judicially review the Deportation Order
was dismissed on June 28, 2016.
[4]
On March 23, 2015, Mr. Abbas made an application
for permanent resident status in Canada as a dependent based on his wife’s
application for permanent residence as a protected person. On December 9,
2016, his application was denied because of his inadmissibility status.
[5]
Mr. Abbas then made an application for
Ministerial relief in respect to his inadmissibility status. That application
remains outstanding.
[6]
On March 1, 2017, Mr. Abbas was offered a PRRA.
A negative decision was rendered on September 8, 2017. Leave to review that
decision has been granted.
[7]
In order to obtain a stay of removal, Mr. Abbas
must establish to my satisfaction that a serious issue is raised in the
underlying application, that he is likely to suffer irreparable harm between
now and the date the underlying application is disposed of if the stay is not granted,
and that the balance of convenience rests with him: Toth v Canada (Minister
of Employment and Immigration), (1998) 86 NR 302 (FCA). All three of these
components must be met.
[8]
The Respondent Ministers concede that a serious
issue has been established, but maintain that Mr. Abbas has failed to meet the
other two conditions.
[9]
Mr. Abbas raised several bases on which he says
irreparable harm has been established. I need not discuss them all. This is
factually a very unique case. Mr. Abbas’s spouse and daughters were accepted
to be Convention refugees based on the risk they face in Pakistan from the
family of Mr. Abbas, and that they had no internal flight alternative. The
reason for that risk appears to extend to Mr. Abbas. I must infer that had Mr.
Abbas been able to present his refugee claim, he too would have been successful
on that basis. Accordingly, there is clear and non-speculative evidence that
he faces a risk to health and life if he is returned to Pakistan at this time;
namely the same risk that founded his family’s positive refugee determination.
[10]
The only assessment made of the risk to Mr.
Abbas in Pakistan is the PRRA decision, and it is currently under review. Mr.
Abbas has established a business that supports his wife and enabled him to
school his daughters. He has no criminal record. I acknowledge the duty of
the Ministers to effect compliance with the Act, but in this case, I find that
the balance of convenience rests with Mr. Abbas.
[11]
The motion succeeds.
[12]
It is agreed that The Minister of Public Safety
and Emergency Preparedness, the Minister responsible for removals, ought to be
added as a respondent for the purposes of this motion.
Email this Content