Date: 20000215
Docket: IMM-1827-99
MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC, THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2000
PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MADAM JUSTICE TREMBLAY-LAMER
BETWEEN:
BADIBANGA NGOYI
Applicant
AND
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
O R D E R
The application for judicial review is allowed. The matter is sent back for redetermination by a newly constituted panel.
Certified true translation
Martine Brunet, LL.B.
Date: 20000215
Docket: IMM-1827-99
Between:
BADIBANGA NGOYI
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
TREMBLAY-LAMER J.
[1] This is an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Division that the applicant is not a Convention refugee.
[2] The applicant alleges that he is a member of the Union pour la démocratie et le progrès social [UDPS " Union for democracy and social progress] and an activist in the "Les Toges Noires" association. He says he was arrested on February 24, 1998 while he was distributing some tracts with other colleagues from the UDPS. At a meeting in February 1998, the applicant and other members had decided to organize a demonstration on February 27, 1998 that would paralyze all activity in the city of Kinshasa in order to protest the arrest of the UDPS president and demand his release.
[3] On February 24, 1998, when the applicant was in downtown Kinshasa to distribute some pamphlets with his companions, some individuals savagely mistreated and arrested them, he says. They were piled into a van and taken to an unknown place.
[4] The applicant alleges that he was beaten and tortured for three days. On the fourth day, he took advantage of the guards" inattention to escape.
[5] The applicant then went to his uncle"s place in Kinshasa where he hid for two and a half months. His uncle then contacted his relatives and was told that the officers of the Agence nationale de renseignements [National Information Agency] had gone to his place to look for him and that they had threatened his relatives.
[6] Seeing how serious the situation was, the applicant"s family took some steps to get him a French passport and on May 10, 1998, he managed to get to the Congo. From there the applicant went to France, then the United States and arrived in Canada on May 17, 1998 to claim refugee status the same day.
[7] The Refugee Division found that the applicant lacked credibility.
[8] The applicant criticizes the panel primarily for failing to consider the article from a newspaper in his country, "La Référence Plus", dated March 7, 1998,1 as evidence corroborating his story.
[9] He points out that the panel embarked on a malicious analysis of the syntax in the newspaper extract and in particular of the word "veille" [eve or day before] in order to conclude that his arrest a few days earlier was improbable.
[10] He submits that the article in question was relevant owing to the fact that his name appears specifically and that it reported his disappearance the day before the one-day city-wide shutdown, which is consistent with the applicant"s testimony.
[11] After a careful reading of the evidence and the transcript, I agree with Mr. LeBrun, the applicant"s counsel.
[12] The applicant"s examination on the meaning of the word "veille" discloses that he was talking about his arrest shortly before the demonstration. The panel noted an error in syntax, giving it a clearly exaggerated weight in view of the applicant"s explanations. In my opinion, it was perverse to question his credibility on this point.
[13] Furthermore, the article does not contradict the applicant"s version, since it reports his disappearance and not his arrest. The Refugee Division did not question the document"s authenticity, so it should at least have recognized that this evidence did not contradict the applicant but corroborated his story as to the fact that he is described by the UDPS authorities as a UDPS fighter and that his disappearance was noted on the eve of the one-day city-wide shutdown.
[14] This incident was at the heart of the claim, and a misinterpretation of the evidence on this central point in the claim strikes a fatal blow to the decision, especially since the anomalies raised concerning the other documents " the membership card in the UDPS and the affidavit of the "Toges Noires" " are relatively insignificant compared with the completely plausible explanations of the applicant.
[15] The application for judicial review is allowed. The matter is sent back for redetermination by a newly constituted panel.
Danièle Tremblay-Lamer
J.
MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC
February 15, 2000
Certified true translation
Martine Brunet, LL.B.
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
Date: 20000214 [sic]
Docket: IMM-1827-99
Between:
BADIBANGA NGOYI
Applicant
AND
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
| PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec |
| DATE OF HEARING: February 9, 2000 |
REASONS FOR ORDER OF TREMBLAY-LAMER J.
DATED: February 15, 2000
APPEARANCES:
Michel Le Brun for the applicant
Caroline Doyon for the respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Michel Le Brun
Montréal, Quebec for the applicant
Morris Rosenberg
| Deputy Attorney General of Canada for the respondent |
__________________
1 Exhibit D-8.
Email this Content