TB1-04037

TB1-04037

The panel found the claimant's testimony and PIF narrative inconsistent, evasive and implausible, drew negative inferences regarding key elements (PSB pursuit, raid details, identity of informants, passport/exit), gave little weight to unauthenticated documents, and concluded on the balance of probabilities that the claimant was not a Falun Gong practitioner in China, was not pursued by the PSB, and that the claim was made fraudulently; therefore she is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Citation
TB1-04037
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
28 November 2012
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (irpa) / Hearing Concluded; Merits Decision Issued
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant found neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Credibility Assessment, Sur Place Claim, Persecution for Religion (falun Gong), Country Conditions Evidence
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Credibility Assessment Sur Place Claim Persecution for Religion (falun Gong) +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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (irpa) / Hearing Concluded; Merits Decision Issued

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection
  2. 2 Credibility of claimant's testimony and PIF regarding Falun Gong practice in China
  3. 3 Whether the claimant was pursued by the Public Security Bureau (PSB) in China

Ratio Decidendi

The panel found the claimant's testimony and PIF narrative inconsistent, evasive and implausible, drew negative inferences regarding key elements (PSB pursuit, raid details, identity of informants, passport/exit), gave little weight to unauthenticated documents, and concluded on the balance of probabilities that the claimant was not a Falun Gong practitioner in China, was not pursued by the PSB, and that the claim was made fraudulently; therefore she is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant found neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the claim for refugee protection