MB0-01886

MB0-01886

The Tribunal found there were not serious reasons for considering the principal claimant committed a serious non-political crime because the evidence indicated political motivation, reliance on coerced statements and torture, lack of direct evidence of personal enrichment, and context of politicized prosecutions in Bangladesh; consequently Article 1F(b) did not apply. The Tribunal further found the claimants have a well-founded fear of persecution and risk of torture/cruel treatment on return, no adequate state protection or internal flight alternative exists, and family membership places the spouse at risk, and therefore both claimants are Convention refugees under section 96 of the Act.

Citation
MB0-01886
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Spouse and Co Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Respondent/intervenor: Minister of Public Safety (intervenor)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 August 2014
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Decision (oral Reasons)
Outcome
Both claimants accepted as Convention refugees under section 96 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act
Legal Topics
Article 1 F(b) Exclusion, Politically Motivated Prosecution, Well Founded Fear of Persecution, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Cruel and Unusual Punishment
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law International Law Criminal Law Article 1 F(b) Exclusion Politically Motivated Prosecution Well Founded Fear of Persecution State Protection +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXX XXXX

Spouse and Co Claimant

Minister of Public Safety (intervenor)

Respondent/intervenor

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Decision (oral Reasons)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there are serious reasons for considering the claimant committed a serious non-political crime (Article 1F(b) UN Convention)
  2. 2 Whether the claims are politically motivated and whether evidence of torture undermines prosecution
  3. 3 Whether claimants have a well‑founded fear of persecution on return

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found there were not serious reasons for considering the principal claimant committed a serious non-political crime because the evidence indicated political motivation, reliance on coerced statements and torture, lack of direct evidence of personal enrichment, and context of politicized prosecutions in Bangladesh; consequently Article 1F(b) did not apply. The Tribunal further found the claimants have a well-founded fear of persecution and risk of torture/cruel treatment on return, no adequate state protection or internal flight alternative exists, and family membership places the spouse at risk, and therefore both claimants are Convention refugees under section 96 of the Act.

Court Disposition

Both claimants accepted as Convention refugees under section 96 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act

Orders

  • Claims allowed; XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX are refugees and their refugee protection claims are accepted
  • Article 1F(b) exclusion found not to apply to the claimants