MA8-11402

MA8-11402

The claimant's persecution risk was generalized extortion by a criminal/terrorist group motivated by profit and not shown to be linked to a Convention ground or to make him a member of a protected group; furthermore a reasonable internal flight alternative (Annaba) exists given state capacity and reduced terrorist operational capacity, therefore the claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Citation
MA8-11402
Parties
Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Claimant's Counsel: Me Stéphane Hebert; Panel Member: Patrick Lemieux; Tribunal Officer: Catherine Fillion-Lauziere
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 October 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Merits Decision
Outcome
Claim for refugee protection rejected
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility, Nexus to Convention Grounds, Extortion, Torture
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law Terrorism and Criminal Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Internal Flight Alternative +4 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 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

Me Stéphane Hebert

Claimant's Counsel

Patrick Lemieux

Panel Member

Catherine Fillion-Lauziere

Tribunal Officer

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Merits Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimant is a person in need of protection under s.97(1) IRPA
  3. 3 Whether alleged harm has nexus to a Convention ground

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's persecution risk was generalized extortion by a criminal/terrorist group motivated by profit and not shown to be linked to a Convention ground or to make him a member of a protected group; furthermore a reasonable internal flight alternative (Annaba) exists given state capacity and reduced terrorist operational capacity, therefore the claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claim for refugee protection rejected

Orders

  • Claim for refugee protection is refused
  • Claimant is not a Convention refugee under section 96 of the IRPA