TB8-26412

TB8-26412

The RAD dismissed the appeal and confirmed the RPD: objective evidence establishes that Uyghurs face systematic repression in Xinjiang since 2016, the respondents have nexus to a Convention ground (ethnicity/religion), the RPD conducted a proper individualized assessment despite credibility issues, there is no adequate state protection or viable internal flight alternative, and therefore the respondents have a well‑founded fear of persecution and are Convention refugees.

Citation
TB8-26412
Parties
Principal Respondent: XXXX XXXX (Principal Respondent); Second Respondent: XXXX XXXX (Second Respondent); Appellant Minister: Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship (Appellant)
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
31 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Immigration and Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (rad Dismissal)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed; respondents found to be Convention Refugees pursuant to section 111(1)(a) IRPA
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Well Founded Fear, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Country Conditions, Credibility Assessment, Group Based Persecution (uyghurs)
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Convention Refugee Well Founded Fear State Protection Internal Flight Alternative +3 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 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX (Principal Respondent)

Principal Respondent

XXXX XXXX (Second Respondent)

Second Respondent

Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship (Appellant)

Appellant Minister

Procedural Posture

Immigration and Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division) / Decision on Appeal (rad Dismissal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred by conferring refugee status absent personalized risk evidence
  2. 2 Whether membership in the Uyghur ethnic group establishes nexus to a Convention ground
  3. 3 Whether objective country conditions and studies abroad establish a real risk despite delay and prior re‑availment

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD dismissed the appeal and confirmed the RPD: objective evidence establishes that Uyghurs face systematic repression in Xinjiang since 2016, the respondents have nexus to a Convention ground (ethnicity/religion), the RPD conducted a proper individualized assessment despite credibility issues, there is no adequate state protection or viable internal flight alternative, and therefore the respondents have a well‑founded fear of persecution and are Convention refugees.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed; respondents found to be Convention Refugees pursuant to section 111(1)(a) IRPA

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed by Refugee Appeal Division
  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division dated September 5, 2018 confirmed