Date: 20000829
Docket: IMM-6320-99
BETWEEN:
PETER BAKONYI
PETERNE BAKONYI
DALMA BAKONYI
NOEMI BAKONYI
Applicants
- and -
THE MINISTER OF
CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
LUTFY A.C.J.:
[1] Despite the thoughtful submissions of their counsel, the applicants have failed to establish any reviewable error in the decision of the Convention Refugee Determination Division that they are not Convention refugees. The applicants are a Roma family from Hungary.
[2] It was opened to the tribunal to reach its negative findings of credibility on certain aspects of the testimony of the applicant Peter Bakonyi. The alleged incident of August 1997, involving a physical attack against the applicant and his brother-in-law in the latter's home by approximately eight skinheads, was not mentioned in the personal information form. Similarly, the tribunal was concerned with the vagueness of Mr. Bakonyi's evidence concerning the police involvement immediately subsequent to the incident and the alleged release of the skinheads who may have been responsible for the attack against the applicants on December 31, 1997. The tribunal was prepared to accept that the attack against the family did occur but found that Mr. Bakonyi's vague responses did not establish the absence of state protection.
[3] The applicants also challenge the tribunal's finding that Mr. Bakonyi "...is not afraid of returning to Hungary". On my reading of the decision under review, this statement was made in the context of his encounters with the Hungarian criminal justice system. The tribunal's comment is better understood when read in the light of Mr. Bakonyi's evidence that he would not want to return to jail in Hungary "...because it would ruin my reputation".
[4] In my view, the tribunal's reasons for decision disclose a careful analysis of the documentary evidence concerning the plight of the Romani people in Hungary. Again, the applicants have failed to show any reviewable error in the tribunal's well-articulated conclusion that the discrimination and the harm that they may have suffered in the past and the discrimination and the harassment that the Bakonyi children may face in the Hungarian school system, do not constitute a serious possibility of persecution.
[5] For these reasons, this application for judicial review will be dismissed. Neither party suggested the certification of a serious question.
"Allan Lutfy"
A.C.J.
Toronto, Ontario
August 29, 2000
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
| STYLE OF CAUSE: PETER BAKONYI, PETERNE BAKONYI, |
DALMA BAKONYI, NOEMI BAKONYI
Applicants
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND
IMMIGRATION
Respondent
| DATE OF HEARING: TUESDAY, AUGUST 29, 2000 |
| PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO |
| REASONS FOR ORDER BY: LUTFY A.C.J. |
DATED: TUESDAY, AUGUST 29, 2000
| APPEARANCES BY: Mr. Peter G. Ivanyi |
| SOLICITORS OF RECORD: ROCHON/GENOVA |
Barristers and Solicitors
121 Richmond Street West, Suite 903
Toronto, Ontario
M5H 2K1
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
For the Respondent
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Date: 20000829
Docket: IMM-6320-99
BETWEEN:
PETERNE BAKONYI
DALMA BAKONYI
NOEMI BAKONYI
Applicants
- and -
THE MINISTER OF
CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
Email this Content