Date: 20040714
Docket: IMM-5243-03
Citation: 2004 FC 987
Toronto, Ontario, July 14th, 2004
Present: The Honourable Madam Justice Simpson
BETWEEN:
DORCAS OLUSOLA SANUSI
OLATUNJI OLALERE SANUSI
and OLADAYO OWOLABI SANUSI
through his litigation guardian
DORCAS OLUSOLA SANUSI
Applicants
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
Introduction
[1] This is a proceeding pursuant to s.74 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27 (the "IRPA") for judicial review under the Federal Court Act R.S.C. 1985, c. F-7 of a decision of Mary Bennett (the "PRRA Officer"), dated April 11, 2003 wherein the PRRA Officer found that the Applicants had not established their claim pursuant to ss.96 or 97 of IRPA (the "Decision").
[2] The Applicants, who for the purpose of the Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (the "PRRA") were considered to be citizens of Sierra Leone, have submitted that the PRRA Officer erred in the following ways:
· She was biased against the Applicants as demonstrated by her one-sided approach to the documentary evidence.
· She failed to acknowledge that counsel's submissions for the PRRA established a link between the Applicants' situation and the documentary evidence.
· She relied on extrinsic evidence without notice to the Applicants.
· She failed to assess the risk facing the minor Applicants.
Discussion
[3] Following her review of the documentary evidence, the PRRA Officer concluded that it was reasonable to take an optimistic view of the admittedly unsettled situation in Sierra Leone as it made a transition from a devastating civil war to a peaceful democracy. However, on taking this view, she did not ignore the negative aspects of the situation. She referred to the "horrific atrocities and other abuses that marked the ten-year war" and she noted that the "ill disciplined army and police" needed to be reformed, rehabilitated and restructured in the post civil war era. Accordingly, I am not persuaded that the PRRA Officer was biased or unfair in her assessment of the documentary evidence.
[4] The PRRA Officer concluded that counsel failed to link the documentary evidence to the Applicants' personal situation. According to counsel's PRRA submissions the risk was said to exist "because of the principal Applicants' father's political leaning, that is, past connection to political dissidents".
[5] In this context, the Applicant says that the PRRA Officer erred in that she failed to mention in her notes that the US DOS report of 2001 said that rebels and their collaborators were summarily executed by troops supported by the government. As well, she neglected to refer to the concern about new conflicts in Sierra Leone caused by problems in neighbouring countries. Finally, no mention was made of a comment in the Human Rights Watch World Report 2003 saying that refugees sometimes faced problems from former rebels on their return to Sierra Leone.
[6] On reviewing the record I have found that, as the PRRA Officer stated, counsel's PRRA submissions did not link the Applicants' case to these or any other documentary references. Accordingly, the PRRA Officer was correct when she concluded that no linkage had been established.
[7] In this case the Applicants were present when Nigerian authorities explained why the minor Applicants were not entitled to Nigerian citizenship. For this reason, this case does not involve extrinsic evidence.
[8] The PRRA Officer's failure to assess any risk to the minor Applicants is not a reviewable error in this case because nowhere in the PRRA submissions was there any suggestion that the children would be at risk in Sierra Leone.
Certification
[9] The Applicants asked that I certify a question about the applicable standard of review if my decision was based on that issue. However, since that is not the case, no question will be certified for appeal.
ORDER
THIS COURT ORDERS that, for all these reasons, the application is hereby dismissed.
"Sandra J. Simpson"
J.F.C.
FEDERAL COURT
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: IMM-5243-03
STYLE OF CAUSE: DORCAS OLUSOLA SANUSI
OLATUNJI OLALERE SANUSI
and OLADAYO OWOLABI SANUSI
through his litigation guardian
DORCAS OLUSOLA SANUSI
Applicants
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND
IMMIGRATION
Respondent
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
DATE OF HEARING: JULY 13, 2004
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER BY: SIMPSON J.
DATED: JULY 14, 2004
APPEARANCES BY:
Mr. Matthew Jeffrey
FOR THE APPLICANTS
Ms. Alexis Singer
FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Mr. Matthew Jeffrey
Toronto, Ontario
FOR THE APPLICANTS
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Toronto, Ontario
FOR THE RESPONDENT
FEDERAL COURT
Date: 20040714
Docket: IMM-5243-03
BETWEEN:
DORCAS OLUSOLA SANUSI
OLATUNJI OLALERE SANUSI
and OLADAYO OWOLABI SANUSI
through his litigation guardian
DORCAS OLUSOLA SANUSI
Applicants
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
Email this Content