Date: 20040322
Docket: IMM-1178-03
Citation: 2004 FC 422
Ottawa, Ontario, March 22, 2004
Present: The Honourable Madam Justice Tremblay-Lamer
BETWEEN:
KARINA MARQUEZ CABELLERO
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1] This is an application for judicial review of a decision by the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (the panel) that the applicant and her husband are not persons in need of protection or Convention refugees, on the basis that their story lacked credibility.
[2] In essence, the applicant and her husband claimed that the applicant's ex-husband, Salvador Islas Barrera (Salvador) caused them problems because he did not want the applicant to leave him and marry her husband.
[3] The applicant submits that the panel demonstrated bias toward her during the hearing. The panel, she says, was impatient and aggressive with her, spoke in a raised voice several times, made sarcastic remarks and interrupted her during her testimony.
[4] The applicable test to determine if there is a reasonable apprehension of bias is the following: would a reasonably informed bystander perceive bias on the part of an adjudicator? (Newfoundland Telephone Co. v. Newfoundland (Board of Commissioners of Public Utilities), [1992] 1 S.C.R. 623, at page 636).
[5] It has been well established in the caselaw that the members of the panel have the right to cross-examine the witnesses that they hear. Further, the panel can question a claimant energetically to ensure that the witness is telling the truth (Mahendran v. MEI (1991), 134 N.R. 316 (F.C.A.)).
[6] After a careful review of the transcript, I am persuaded that this is what the panel did in this case. Although I noted a few impatient remarks, I detected, rather, as in the matter of Mahendran case, a sense of frustration at being unable to get a clear picture of the general purport of the evidence being given.
[7] Moreover, since the applicant did not submit any recording of the hearing, it is impossible for this Court to appreciate the tone or the volume of the panel's voice. I also observe that the panel never treated the applicant like a liar, contrary to what she alleges in her affidavit, filed in support of this application. I cannot find, in this case, that the panel's conduct justifies a reasonable apprehension of bias.
[8] As for the panel's finding relative to the lack of credibility, in light of the contradictions noted by the panel, the evidence which reveals that there was at least one voluntary return to Mexico, as well as the fact that the applicant did not lodge a complaint about Salvador until 2002, i.e. until her and her husband had already decided to leave Mexico, I am of the opinion that this finding cannot be described as unreasonable and does not enable this Court to intervene.
[9] For these reasons, this application for judicial review is dismissed.
ORDER
THE COURT ORDERS that the application for judicial review be dismissed.
"Danièle Tremblay-Lamer"
JUDGE
Certified true translation
Kelley A. Harvey, BA, BCL, LLB
FEDERAL COURT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET : IMM-1178-03
STYLE OF CAUSE: KARINA MARQUEZ CABELLERO v. THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec
DATE OF HEARING: March 18, 2004
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER BY: The Honourable Madam Justice Tremblay-Lamer
DATE OF REASONS: March 22, 2004
APPEARANCES:
Brigitte Poirier FOR THE APPLICANT
Marie-Claude Demers FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Brigitte Poirier
4385 St-Hubert Street
Montréal, Quebec
H2J 2X1 FOR THE APPLICANT
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Montréal, Quebec FOR THE RESPONDENT
Email this Content