Sharif v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2001 FCT 542

Date: 20010529

Docket: IMM-1816-00

Neutral citation: 2001 FCT 542

BETWEEN:

                                      FARHAN SHARIF

                                                                                            Applicant

                                                 - and -

   THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

                                                                                           Defendant

                                REASONS FOR ORDER

DUBÉ J. :

[1]    This application is for the judicial review of a decision of the Convention Refugee Determination Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board ("the Board"), dated February 8, 2000, wherein the Board determined that the applicant was not a convention refugee.

1. Facts

[2]    The applicant is a citizen of Pakistan who alleges a well-founded fear of persecution on the grounds of his political opinions and his membership in the Pakistan Peoples Party ("the PPP") since 1993. His father was also an elected Election Agent for the 1997 election. On the day of the election, the Pakistan Muslim League ("the PML") burned the tent of the PPP election camp and also inflicted injuries upon the applicant's father who allegedly died in December 1997 as a result of these injuries.

[3]    The applicant also claims that the PML came to his house and fired in the air and at the house and shot him in his left leg. One week prior to the subsequent 1998 election, the applicant was allegedly ordered by the PML candidate and four of his supporters to withdraw his political and financial support of the PPP candidate. However, the applicant informed them that he may himself be nominated as a PPP candidate for the Punjab assembly. Upon victory after the election, the PML members led a procession to the applicant's place of business, an automobile showroom, and allegedly destroyed it. The applicant was subsequently arrested for provoking the people against the police. Later on, the applicant allegedly went into hiding until July 15, when he fled to Hong Kong, then to Beijing. He arrived in Canada on February 12, 1999.

2. Decision of the Board

[4]                At the outset of a long and detailed decision, the Board found the whole of the applicant's testimony not to be credible. It wrote that "the applicant's testimony was often hesitant, evasive and confused". It concluded that "the applicant's very general notions about the important issues and topics supported by the PPP damaged his credibility". It found "contradictions, inconsistencies and improbabilities which seriously undermined his credibility". The Board proceeded to analyse several of those inconsistencies and improbabilities.

3. Analysis

[5]                This Court has consistently held that a finding of a lack of credibility made by the Board is part of its discretionary powers, and where such findings are made, this Court should not readily intrude^[1] . The Court should not interfere with the decision of the Board based on evidence that, taken as a whole, could support a negative assessment of credibility^[2]. When a decision is made on an assessment of credibility, it is not the role of this Court to substitute its decision for that of the Board even if the Court might not have reached the same conclusion.

[6]                The Board's determination appears to be reasonable in the circumstances. In support of its negative credibility finding, the Board stated the grounds upon which it relied, including examples of the numerous implausibilities and problems arising from the applicant's evidence. Although the Board could have elaborated somewhat further on its reasons for giving the applicant's documentary evidence little value, that by itself does not amount to a reviewable error.

4. Disposition

[7]                In light of the foregoing, it is clear that the applicant has not successfully established a basis for interfering with the Board's decision. Consequently, the application for judicial review is dismissed.

[8]                I agree with both counsel that there is no serious question of general importance to be certified.

OTTAWA, Ontario

May 29, 2001

                                                                                                   Judge

Date: 20010529

Docket: IMM-1816-00

OTTAWA, ONTARIO, THIS 29^th DAY OF MAY 2001

PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.E. DUBÉ

BETWEEN:

                                      FARHAN SHARIF

                                                                                            Applicant

                                                 - and -

   THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

                                                                                           Defendant

                                               ORDER

The application for judicial review is dismissed.

                                                                                                   Judge

FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA TRIAL DIVISION

NAMES OF SOLICITORS AND SOLICITORS ON THE RECORD

COURT FILE NO.:                      IMM-1816-00

STYLE OF CAUSE:                   FARHAN SHARIF v. MCI

PLACE OF HEARING:              MONTREAL, QUEBEC

DATE OF HEARING:                 May 23, 2001

REASONS FOR ORDER OF The Honourable Mr. Justice Dubé DATED: May 29, 2001

APPEARANCES:

Mrs. Styliani MarkakiFOR THE APPLICANT

Mrs. Thi My Dung TranFOR THE RESPONDENT

SOLICITORS ON THE RECORD:

Mrs. Styliani Markaki                                                             FOR THE APPLICANT Nadler, Joffe

Mr. Morris Rosenberg                                                           FOR THE RESPONDENT Deputy Attorney General of Canada