IMM-2166-96
BETWEEN:
ABDUL
KARIM FAZL
Applicant
-
and -
THE MINISTER OF
CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS
FOR ORDER
JEROME, A.C.J.:
This is an application for
an order setting aside the decision of the Convention Refugee Determination
Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board which held the applicant was not
a Convention refugee. At the hearing of this matter, I dismissed the
application indicating these written reasons would follow.
By decision dated May 30,
1996, the Refugee Division concluded that Mr. Fazl was not a Convention refugee
as he had an internal flight alternative (IFA) in northern Afghanistan. The
decision states as follows at pp. 2 and 4-5:
Much of northern Afghanistan, including the city of Mazar-i Sharif, is
controlled not by the government in Kabul of President Rabbani, nor by the
Taliban militia, but by General Abdul Rashid Dostum.
.
. .
There are some persons who, for whatever reason, have run afoul of
General Dostum's forces and experienced treatment that could fairly be
described as persecutory. However, when we consider the particular
circumstances of the claimant before us, can it be said he faces a serious
possibility of persecution in northern Afghanistan? In our opinion, the answer
must be in the negative.
The claimant is an ethnic Tajik. However, ethnic Tajiks make up a
significant portion of the base of General Dostum's support, and therefore we
do not find the claimant to face a serious possibility of persecution in
General Dostum's region by reason of his being an ethnic Tajik.
.
. .
The claimant alleges that he is perceived to have a connection to the
communist regime that formerly ruled Afghanistan. General Dostum himself is a
former communist, his militia was organized by former communists, and includes
former communist within its ranks. We therefore find that there is no serious
possibility that the claimant would be persecuted in norther Afghanistan
because of a perception that he is linked to the former communist regime.
The claimant can be described as an educated person, an intellectual, or
an academic. This may very well give him reason for fearing persecution in
those parts of Afghanistan controlled by Islamist fundamentalists. But General
Dostum is no fundamentalist: he is in fact a secular anti-fundamentalist, he
opposes religious fundamentalism, his support from foreign powers is in party
motivated by his anti-fundamentalist stance, and intellectuals actually flee
Kabul to seek refuge in his territory. We therefore do not find the claimant
to face a serious possibility of persecution in norther Afghanistan by reason
of his being an educated intellectual and academic.
The applicant now seeks to
have the decision set aside on the grounds that the tribunal erred in
concluding he had an internal flight alternative (IFA) in northern
Afghanistan.
I am satisfied that, in
making its determination, the Board correctly applied the test set out by the
Federal Court of Appeal in Rasaratnam v. Minister of Employment and
Immigration, [1992] 1 F.C. 706 at p. 711:
. . . the Board was required to be satisfied, on the balance of
probabilities, that there was no serious possibility of the Appellant being
persecuted in Colombo and that, in all the circumstances including
circumstances particular to him, conditions in Colombo were such that it would
not be unreasonable for the Appellant to seek refuge there.
Here, the panel's
conclusion concerning the existence of an IFA in northern Afghanistan was based
on documentary evidence and the testimony of the applicant. Furthermore, it
was reached in accordance with the applicable law. I am unable to conclude
therefore the panel ignored the evidence before it or that its findings were
perverse or capricious. In the absence of such an overriding error, there is
simply no basis for judicial interference with the decision.
For these reasons the
application is dismissed.
O T T A W A
July 31, 1997
"James A. Jerome"
A.C.J.
Email this Content