MA9-09030

MA9-09030

The claimant failed to rebut the presumption that Algeria can protect its nationals because reliable objective country evidence showed improved security and active counter-terrorism efforts and the claimant made no attempt to avail himself of domestic protection or present clear and convincing evidence of failure; therefore he is neither a Convention refugee under section 96 nor a person in need of protection under subsection 97(1).

Citation
MA9-09030
Parties
Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Decision Maker: Me Sonia Beaupré; Adjudicative Body: Immigration and Refugee Board, Refugee Protection Division
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Refugee protection claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee under section 96 IRPA nor a person in need of protection under subsection 97(1) IRPA
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Particular Social Group, Political Opinion, State Protection, Terrorism, Burden of Proof
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Protection State Protection Human Rights Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Particular Social Group Political Opinion +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 4 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

Me Sonia Beaupré

Decision Maker

Immigration and Refugee Board, Refugee Protection Division

Adjudicative Body

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee under section 96 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimant is a person in need of protection under subsection 97(1) IRPA
  3. 3 Whether state protection in Algeria was available and effective

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to rebut the presumption that Algeria can protect its nationals because reliable objective country evidence showed improved security and active counter-terrorism efforts and the claimant made no attempt to avail himself of domestic protection or present clear and convincing evidence of failure; therefore he is neither a Convention refugee under section 96 nor a person in need of protection under subsection 97(1).

Court Disposition

Refugee protection claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee under section 96 IRPA nor a person in need of protection under subsection 97(1) IRPA

Orders

  • Refugee protection claim rejected