MB2-06642

MB2-06642

The claims were denied because the tribunal found that survivors who testified before Gacaca do not constitute a particular social group for the purposes of section 96, the asserted political opinion did not engage state persecution, and the claimant's evidence of current threat from XXXX lacked credibility; on the balance of probabilities there was no serious possibility of persecution or risk to life or cruel and unusual treatment on return to Rwanda.

Citation
MB2-06642
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXX; Minor Claimant: XXXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (immigration and Refugee Protection Act) / Merits Hearing — Decision
Outcome
Refugee protection claims denied for both claimants
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Particular Social Group, Political Opinion, Credibility Assessment, Gacaca Courts, Persecution Nexus
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Particular Social Group Political Opinion Credibility Assessment +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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXX

Principal Claimant

XXXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (immigration and Refugee Protection Act) / Merits Hearing — Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants are Convention refugees under section 96
  2. 2 Whether the claimants are persons in need of protection under section 97(1)
  3. 3 Whether survivors who testified before Gacaca constitute a particular social group

Ratio Decidendi

The claims were denied because the tribunal found that survivors who testified before Gacaca do not constitute a particular social group for the purposes of section 96, the asserted political opinion did not engage state persecution, and the claimant's evidence of current threat from XXXX lacked credibility; on the balance of probabilities there was no serious possibility of persecution or risk to life or cruel and unusual treatment on return to Rwanda.

Court Disposition

Refugee protection claims denied for both claimants

Orders

  • Decision dated July 3, 2014 denying refugee protection for XXXX XXXX XXX and XXXXX XXXX XXXX