Date: 20020529
Docket: IMM-3384-01
Neutral citation: 2002 FCT 616
BETWEEN:
SWARAN KAUR
PARAMJIT KAUR
partie demanderesse
et
LE MINISTRE DE LA CITOYENNETÉ
ET DE L'IMMIGRATION
partie défenderesse
REASONS FOR ORDER
LEMIEUX J.
[1] I am of the view this judicial review application by the applicants Swaran Kaur and her daughter Paramjit Kaur, both citizens of India, challenging a May 31, 2002 finding by the Refugee Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (the tribunal) they were not convention refugees must be dismissed.
[2] Their claims are based on their being members of a particular social group - the family - and the heart of their claims centers on Swaran Kaur's husband, a senior Congress party worker, who went into hiding fearing the police who came after him after he had lodged a complaint against the officer in charge (OIC) of the local police station and a cousin of the successful candidate who along with others sought revenge against him because of his election activities.
[3] After he lodged the complaint with higher police authorities of the district, there was a promise to investigate. Subsequently, the OIC came to the family and threatened the husband who was away in Delhi. He went into hiding. The OIC came back looking for the husband but he was not there. Mrs. Kaur was mistreated and her daughter raped. The house was set afire and Paramjit badly burned.
[4] The tribunal did not believe their story; it found that it had been subjected to a totally fabricated story.
[5] What led the tribunal to this critical finding was medical evidence (the Daigle Report) of Paramjit Kaur's burns introduced at the hearing of her brother's claim which was being studied by another panel.
[6] The Daigle report concluded Paramjit's scars were old ones not attributable to a recent fire. The applicants were given ample opportunity by the tribunal to rebut this medical report. They provided three medical reports but the tribunal found none of them attacked the central findings of the Daigle Report.
[7] Counsel for the applicants attacked the basis of the Daigle report on a number of grounds but at the end of the day had to concede, correctly in my view, that none of the evidence provided by the applicants successfully impeached the Daigle report.
[8] As a result, the critical finding upon which the tribunal rejected the applicants' story - persecution by the police because of the husband's complaint - stands.
[9] Counsel for the applicant argued other errors made by the tribunal: (1) a requirement to corroborate their oral testimony (2) a misapprehension by the tribunal of the true nature of the husband's fear (persecution because he was a member of the Congress party which seems to be the view the tribunal took versus his fear of persecution because he made a complaint against the police) and (3) inappropriate findings on state protection.
[10] I find the substance of these alleged errors dependent on police persecution which the tribunal did not believe occurred here, a finding which cannot be disturbed.
[11] For these reasons, this judicial review application is dismissed. No certified question was raised.
"François Lemieux"
Judge
Montreal, Quebec
May 29, 2002
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
Date: 20020529
Docket: IMM-3384-01
BETWEEN:
SWARAN KAUR
PARAMJIT KAUR
partie demanderesse
et
LE MINISTRE DE LA CITOYENNETÉ
ET DE L'IMMIGRATION
partie défenderesse
REASONS FOR ORDER
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: IMM-3384-01
STYLE OF CAUSE: SWARAN KAUR
PARAMJIT KAUR
partie demanderesse
et
LE MINISTRE DE LA CITOYENNETÉ
ET DE L'IMMIGRATION
partie défenderesse
PLACE OF HEARING: Montreal, Quebec
DATE OF HEARING: May 28, 2002
REASONS FOR ORDER : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE LEMIEUX
DATED: May 29, 2002
APPEARANCES:
Me Styliani Markaki FOR APPLICANT
Me Mario Blanchard FOR RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Me Styliani Markaki
Montreal, Quebec FOR APPLICANT
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Montreal, Quebec FOR RESPONDENT
Email this Content