TB9-20995

TB9-20995

The appeal is dismissed because the newly proffered affidavit and text messages are inadmissible for lack of credibility and appear manufactured to address adverse RPD findings, and because the RPD correctly concluded on the evidence before it that there was no objective basis to find the Appellant would be targeted or harmed in the identified internal flight alternatives; accordingly the Appellant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Citation
TB9-20995
Parties
Appellant / Person in Cause: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent / Minister: Minister of Immigration; Decision‑maker / RAD Member: Maryanne Kingma
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (rad Substantive Appeal)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Internal Flight Alternative, Admissibility of New Evidence, Credibility Assessment, Religious Persecution, Remedies (remittal/substitution)
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Internal Flight Alternative Admissibility of New Evidence Credibility Assessment Religious Persecution +1 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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant / Person in Cause

Minister of Immigration

Respondent / Minister

Maryanne Kingma

Decision‑maker / RAD Member

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (rad Substantive Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether new evidence (affidavit and text messages) is admissible under s.110(4) IRPA and applicable jurisprudence
  2. 2 Whether there is an objective risk of persecution by Boko Haram or others outside north‑east Nigeria
  3. 3 Whether viable internal flight alternatives (Bayelsa, Ogun, Okuta, Port Harcourt, Ondo) exist

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because the newly proffered affidavit and text messages are inadmissible for lack of credibility and appear manufactured to address adverse RPD findings, and because the RPD correctly concluded on the evidence before it that there was no objective basis to find the Appellant would be targeted or harmed in the identified internal flight alternatives; accordingly the Appellant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act; no remittal and no oral hearing ordered