Date: 20050119
Docket: IMM-1493-04
Citation: 2005 FC 82
Toronto, Ontario, Wednesday the 19th day of January, 2005
Present: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE CAMPBELL
BETWEEN:
QUERESHI, WASEEMUDDIN
QUERESHI, FARZAN WASEEM
QUERESHI, FARAZ WASEEM
QUERESHI RANIA WASEEM
QUERESHI, RUKHSANA HASSAN
Applicants
and
MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1] This is a proceeding pursuant to s.72 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27 ("the IRPA") for judicial review of the decision of the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (the "RPD"), dated February 4, 2004, wherein the Applicants were not found to be Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection within the meaning of s.96 and s.97 of the IRPA.
[2] The Applicants are members of a family from Pakistan who fear persecution on the following grounds: mixed-religion marriage (Waseemuddin (Waseem) Quereshi is Sunni and Rukhsana Quereshi is Shia); Waseem Quereshi's Mohajir background; and, Rukhsana Qureshi's, and daughter Rania's, gender.
[3] At the conclusion of the hearing before the RPD, it was agreed that the claims would be determined on the basis of written submissions filed by Counsel for the Applicants. In the present application, the primary argument advanced by Counsel for the Applicants is that the RPD's decision should be set aside because the written submissions filed were apparently completely ignored.
[4] The arguments produced by Counsel for the Applicants call for a determination as to whether, on an objective basis, the Applicants would suffer more than a mere possibility of persecution on each of the generalized grounds claimed. Extensive documentary evidence was produce to substantiate discrimination in Pakistan on each of the grounds, and a corresponding highly detailed argument was produced in support of each. On this basis, I find that the RPD was properly expected to provide responsive, comprehensive reasons for decision.
[5] Counsel for the Applicants frames the objection to the RPD 's decision as a breach of due process. Counsel argues that the cryptic seven-and-a-half page decision is so unresponsive to the extensive generalized objective fear evidence and arguments tendered, it works an unfairness in of itself.
[6] After careful scrutiny of the RPD's decision, I agree.
[7] In my opinion, the off-hand nature of the RPD 's decision does not meet the standard of due process expected of a professionalized tribunal in response to serious generalized claims such as the ones presented in the present case. As a result I find that the decision is made in reviewable error.
ORDER
Accordingly, I set aside the RPD's decision and refer this matter back to a differently constituted panel for redetermination.
"Douglas R. Campbell"
J.F.C.
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
DOCKET: IMM-1493-04
STYLE OF CAUSE: QUERESHI, WASEEMUDDIN
QUERESHI, FARZAN WASEEM
QUERESHI, FARAZ WASEEM
QUERESHI RANIA WASEEM
QUERESHI, RUKHSANA HASSAN
Applicants
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND
IMMIGRATION
Respondent
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
DATE OF HEARING: JANUARY 19, 2005
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER BY: CAMPBELL J.
DATED: JANUARY 19, 2005
APPEARANCES BY:
Randolph K. Hahn For the Applicant
Kareena Wilding For the Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Randolph K. Hahn
Guberman, Garson For the Applicant
John H. Sims Q.C.
Deputy Attorney General of Canada For the Respondent
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Date: 20050119
Docket: IMM-1493-04
BETWEEN:
QUERESHI, WASEEMUDDIN
QUERESHI, FARZAN WASEEM
QUERESHI, FARAZ WASEEM
QUERESHI RANIA WASEEM
QUERESHI, RUKHSANA HASSAN
Applicants
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER
Email this Content