IMM-1324-96
BETWEEN: ELMI SAID BARREH,
Applicant
| AND: THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION OF CANADA, |
Respondent
O R D E R
DENAULT J.:
The application for judicial review is dismissed.
OTTAWA, June 6, 1997
Certified true translation
Christiane Delon
IMM-1324-96
BETWEEN: ELMI SAID BARREH,
Applicant
| AND: THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION OF CANADA, |
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
DENAULT, J.:
The applicant is requesting judicial review of a Refugee Board decision denying him refugee status.
The applicant, a 19-year-old Somali national, left his country in 1995 and upon his arrival in Canada claimed refugee status, fearing persecution by reason of his membership in the Issa tribe. His father, a career soldier in the Somali army, was killed in early 1988. Because of the clan warfare in his country, and the conflict between the Issa militia and government troops, the applicant fears being associated with the Barré clan or criticized for his father"s membership in the armed forces.
The Refugee Board, after carefully reviewing the documentary evidence in relation to the applicant"s testimony, dismissed his application for various reasons, the main one being:
| |
When faced with his evidence and that of credible and trustworthy documentary evidence which has covered events since the time of his departure until the present, the panel places more weight on those documents than the claimant"s testimony in order to determine the well-foundedness of his fear. |
|
This conclusion is the main target of the applicant"s counsel. She argues that the panel erred in law by assigning greater weight to the documentary evidence than it did to the applicant"s testimony.1 More particularly, she submits that in so far as the applicant"s testimony was not considered credible, the facts he reported should be considered as proven.
It is true that in this case the tribunal, while not holding that the testimony was not credible, did not accept the interpretation expressed therein. But after analyzing this testimony, and the documentary evidence, it exercised its right to assess the evidence by assigning greater weight to the documentation. In particular, the tribunal held that the evidence failed to indicate that the applicant had a well-founded fear of persecution. This is a conclusion that the tribunal could reasonably arrive at, and, because it has not been demonstrated that the tribunal erred in law in making its decision, or that it based its decision on an erroneous finding of fact that it made in a perverse or capricious manner or without regard for the material before it, I ought not to intervene.
For these reasons, the application is dismissed.
OTTAWA, June 6, 1997
Certified true translation
Christiane Delon
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
| STYLE: ELMI SAID BARREH V. M.C.I. |
| PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec |
| DATE OF HEARING: April 9, 1997 |
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF DENAULT J.
APPEARANCES:
| Michelle Langelier FOR THE APPLICANT |
| Caroline Doyon FOR THE RESPONDENT |
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
| Michelle Langelier FOR THE APPLICANT |
Montréal, Quebec
| George Thomson FOR THE RESPONDENT |
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
__________________
1 Mileva v. M.E.I. (1991), 15 Imm. L.R. (2d) 204 (F.C.A.); Okyere-Akosah v. M.E.I., A-92-91 (April 28, 1992).
Email this Content