TA5-05991

TA5-05991

Claim rejected because claimant failed to prove he is a conscientious objector within the meaning of the UNHCR Handbook or that US military action in Iraq is of a type condemned by the international community; he failed to rebut the presumption of effective state protection in the United States; punishment for desertion under the UCMJ would be prosecution under a law of general application and not persecution or cruel and unusual treatment; therefore no refugee protection warranted.

Citation
TA5-05991
Parties
Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (a.k.a. XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX); Refugee Protection Officer: V. Currie; Minister's Counsel: L. Christodoulides
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 April 2006
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection (irpa Ss.96,97) / Decision After Hearing
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee and is not a person in need of protection
Legal Topics
Conscientious Objection, Desertion, State Protection, Persecution Vs Prosecution, Credibility Assessment
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law International Humanitarian Law Military Law Administrative Law Conscientious Objection Desertion 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 6 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (a.k.a. XXXX XXXX XXXXXXXX)

Claimant

V. Currie

Refugee Protection Officer

L. Christodoulides

Minister's Counsel

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection (irpa Ss.96,97) / Decision After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee
  2. 2 Whether claimant is a person in need of protection
  3. 3 Whether alleged illegality of the Iraq war is relevant to refugee claim

Ratio Decidendi

Claim rejected because claimant failed to prove he is a conscientious objector within the meaning of the UNHCR Handbook or that US military action in Iraq is of a type condemned by the international community; he failed to rebut the presumption of effective state protection in the United States; punishment for desertion under the UCMJ would be prosecution under a law of general application and not persecution or cruel and unusual treatment; therefore no refugee protection warranted.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee and is not a person in need of protection

Orders

  • Refugee protection claim rejected
  • Volume 1 of claimant's disclosure returned to counsel