Date: 20010124
Docket: IMM-788-00
Ottawa, Ontario, the 24th day of January, 2001
Present: The Honourable Mr. Justice Pinard
Between:
COSKUN IBIS
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
ORDER
The application for judicial review of the decision rendered on January 7, 2000 by the Refugee Division, ruling that the applicant is not a Convention refugee, is dismissed.
J.
Certified true translation
Suzanne M. Gauthier, LL.L., Trad. a.
Date: 20010124
Docket: IMM-788-00
Between:
COSKUN IBIS
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
PINARD J.:
[1] This is an application for judicial review of a decision rendered on January 7, 2000 by the Refugee Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board, ruling that the applicant is not a Convention refugee as defined in subsection 2(1) of the Immigration Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. I-2.
[2] The applicant, aged 27, is a citizen of Turkey. He alleges he was persecuted in his country because of his membership in the Kurdish group and his Alevi religion.
[3] The panel rejected the application owing to the applicant's lack of credibility as a result of improbabilities in his testimony.
[4] Having reviewed the evidence, I must acknowledge that in some cases the Refugee Division saw improbabilities where they did not really exist. I refer in particular to the applicant's role aboard the boat on which he fled and his desire to be informed of the arrival of the boat in the United States. However, these errors are not decisive, in view of the other inconsistencies and contradictions that were rightly noted, particularly and primarily the applicant's failure to claim refugee status before arriving in Canada, one of the many countries through which he passed over a period of more than five months. On this latter point, the panel states:
[Translation] Apart from the delay between the claimant's departure from Turkey and the time when he claimed refugee status, the important thing to note here is in fact that he fled his country because he feared for his life, that he traversed some countries that are signatories of an international Convention for the protection of refugees, but without claiming refugee status in those countries without valid reason.
[5] The delay in claiming, while it is not decisive in itself, constitutes an important factor to be considered in an application for refugee status (see, for example, Lameen v. Canada (Secretary of State) (June 7, 1994), A-1626-92). In the particular circumstances of this case, given the delay of more than five months and the numerous countries through which the applicant travelled during this period, I am of the opinion that the failure to claim before arriving in Canada did indeed allow the panel to reasonably conclude that the applicant did not really have the requisite subjective fear of persecution.
[6] For all these reasons, the intervention of this Court is not warranted, and the application for judicial review is dismissed.
J.
OTTAWA, ONTARIO
January 24, 2001
Certified true translation
Suzanne M. Gauthier, LL.L., Trad. a.
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET NO: IMM-788-00
STYLE: COSKUN IBIS v. MCI
PLACE OF HEARING: MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC
DATE OF HEARING: NOV. 29, 2000
REASONS FOR ORDER OF PINARD J.
DATED: JAN. 24, 2001
APPEARANCES:
LENYA KALEPDJIAN
FOR THE APPLICANT
SYLVIANE ROY
FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
LENYA KALEPDJIAN
Montréal, Quebec FOR THE APPLICANT
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada FOR THE RESPONDENT
Email this Content