MB0-00173

MB0-00173

Although claimants were credible about past mistreatment and discrimination as Alevi, the incidents (three principal detentions/assaults over a 12‑year period) constituted harassment and discrimination but did not amount to persecution; claimant lacked a sustained subjective fear (demonstrated by delays and returns to Turkey) and, on objective evidence in the NDP, there is no reasonable chance they would be persecuted or subjected to torture if returned; therefore they are not Convention refugees under s.96 nor persons in need of protection under s.97(1).

Citation
MB0-00173
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Claimant (spouse): XXXXXXXX XXXX; Claimant (minor): XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
11 July 2012
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection (convention Refugee and Person in Need of Protection) / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Claim dismissed; claimants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee Definition, Risk of Torture (cat), Credibility and Subjective Fear, Country Conditions / National Documentation Package
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee Definition Risk of Torture (cat) Credibility and Subjective Fear Country Conditions / National Documentation Package

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Claimant

XXXXXXXX XXXX

Claimant (spouse)

XXXXXXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant (minor)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection (convention Refugee and Person in Need of Protection) / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants qualify as Convention refugees under section 96 of the IRPA
  2. 2 Whether claimants are persons in need of protection under section 97(1) of the IRPA (risk to life or risk of torture)
  3. 3 Whether incidents alleged amount to persecution rather than harassment

Ratio Decidendi

Although claimants were credible about past mistreatment and discrimination as Alevi, the incidents (three principal detentions/assaults over a 12‑year period) constituted harassment and discrimination but did not amount to persecution; claimant lacked a sustained subjective fear (demonstrated by delays and returns to Turkey) and, on objective evidence in the NDP, there is no reasonable chance they would be persecuted or subjected to torture if returned; therefore they are not Convention refugees under s.96 nor persons in need of protection under s.97(1).

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; claimants are not Convention refugees and are not persons in need of protection