Date: 20120510
Docket: IMM-6859-11
Citation: 2012 FC 566
Toronto, Ontario, May 10,
2012
PRESENT: The Honourable Madam Justice Mactavish
BETWEEN:
|
|
YUQIONG WU
|
|
|
|
Applicant
|
|
and
|
|
|
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
|
|
|
|
Respondent
|
|
|
|
|
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT AND
JUDGMENT
[1]
Yuqiong
Wu’s claim for refugee protection was rejected by the Refugee Protection
Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board. The Board did not believe her
story of persecution in China because of her religious
faith, nor did it believe that she is currently a practicing Christian. The
Board also concluded, in the alternative, that in the event that Ms. Wu is in
fact a practicing Christian, she would be able to safely practice her faith in Guangdong province.
[2]
For the
reasons that follow, Ms. Wu has not persuaded me that the Board’s decision was
unreasonable. As a consequence, her application for judicial review will be
dismissed.
The Board’s Negative Credibility Findings
[3]
The Board
provided four different reasons for finding Ms. Wu’s story of her arrest and
detention by the Public Security Bureau (PSB) because of her membership in an
underground church not to be credible. Ms. Wu has only taken issue with one of
these findings: the Board’s concern about the failure of the PSB to leave a
summons for Ms. Wu in the course of its various visits to her home in China.
[4]
The Board
was clearly aware of the documentary evidence indicating that the PSB does not
always leave a summons with family members when it is seeking an individual.
The Board then considered the circumstances of Ms. Wu’s own case, and
determined that a summons could reasonably have been expected to have been left
at her home.
[5]
Ms. Wu had
claimed that the PSB had come looking for her on some five occasions, which,
the Board found, suggested that they had more than a casual interest in her.
The Board was also influenced by the fact that Ms. Wu lived in a major city,
where it would be reasonable to assume that evidence of police interest would
be documented.
[6]
In the circumstances,
it was reasonably open to the Board to conclude that the lack of a summons
raised concerns about the credibility of Ms. Wu’s story.
[7]
I would
also note that even if I had accepted that the Board erred in its finding with
respect to the lack of evidence documenting the PSB’s ongoing interest in Ms.
Wu, the other, unchallenged, negative credibility findings made by the Board
would still be sufficient to support its conclusion that Ms. Wu’s story was not
true, that her general credibility was in doubt, and that her refugee claim had
been made “on a fraudulent basis”.
[8]
While
categorically rejecting Ms. Wu’s story of her arrest and detention by the PSB
because of her membership in an underground church, the Board did, however,
seemingly leave open the possibility that Ms. Wu may have been a practicing
Christian while she was in China: see the Board’s reasons at
para. 17.
[9]
The Board
then considered whether Ms. Wu was a practicing Christian in Canada. It noted the difficulties
associated with assessing the sincerity of an individual’s religious belief and
recognized that Ms. Wu had been able to correctly answer questions about the
Pentecostal faith.
[10]
Based upon
its earlier finding that Ms. Wu’s story of persecution in China was “fraudulent”, the cumulative effect
of its negative credibility findings and “the totality of the evidence”, the
Board concluded that Ms. Wu was not currently a practicing Christian, and that
she had joined a church in Toronto solely to support her
fraudulent refugee claim.
[11]
Ms. Wu’s
refugee claim is based upon what Justice Russell has described as “an almost
generic set of facts”:
Li v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and
Immigration),
2011 FC 941, [2011] F.C.J. No. 1166 (QL) at para. 26. The Board is regularly
confronted by claims by individuals alleging to be Christians, most often from
Fujian or Guangdong province, who provide not-dissimilar descriptions of the
persecution they claim to have suffered on account of their religious faith.
Some of these claims have merit, others do not. The Herculean task for the
Refugee Protection Division is to separate the legitimate claims from the
illegitimate ones.
[12]
The
assessment of a refugee claimant’s credibility is always difficult, and is made
all the more challenging where, as here, what is required is the evaluation of
the sincerity of a person’s religious faith. This is a very difficult task –
one that does not readily lend itself to precise measurement on the basis of
objective criteria, as religious faith is such an intensely personal matter.
[13]
In this
case, the Board was in the best position to gauge Ms. Wu’s credibility. It
determined that she had manufactured a tale of arrest and detention at the
hands of the PSB in order to support her refugee claim, and I have found that
this determination was reasonable. It was also reasonable for the Board to rely
on Ms. Wu’s general lack of credibility to find that she was not currently a
practicing Christian, and that she had joined a church in Toronto solely to support her refugee
claim.
[14]
In light
of my conclusion that the Board’s finding that Ms. Wu is not currently a
practicing Christian was reasonable, it is not necessary for me to address the
Board’s alternate finding that if she was in fact a Christian, Ms. Wu would be
able to practice her faith in Guangdong province.
Conclusion
[15]
There are
thus no grounds upon which I can interfere with the Board’s decision and for these reasons, the application for
judicial review is dismissed.
[16]
Ms. Wu has proposed a
question for certification relating to the definition of religious persecution.
Given the basis upon which this case has been decided, the answer to the
question would not be determinative of the outcome. Consequently no question
will be certified.
JUDGMENT
THIS
COURT ORDERS AND ADJUDGES
that:
1. This
application for judicial review is dismissed; and
2.
No serious question of general importance is certified.
“Anne Mactavish”
Email this Content