TB5-08664

TB5-08664

The panel rejected the claims because the claimants' central allegations were found not credible, documentary evidence was weak or inconsistent and did not corroborate a profile that would attract state persecution; country evidence showed discrimination against Alevis but not persecution, and the claimants did not meet the standards for Convention refugee status or for risk of torture or death; therefore claims dismissed.

Citation
TB5-08664
Parties
Minor Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Claimant (male): XXXX XXXX; Claimant (female): XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
13 April 2016
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection (irpa Ss.96,97) / Decision Following Hearing (reasons Issued)
Outcome
Claims rejected: claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Convention Refugee Determination, Persecution, Risk of Torture, State Protection, Membership of a Particular Social Group (alevi), Political Opinion (bdp/hdp Activism), Gender Based Violence and Child Protection
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Credibility Assessment Convention Refugee Determination Persecution Risk of Torture +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 5 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Minor Claimant

XXXX XXXX

Claimant (male)

XXXX XXXX

Claimant (female)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection (irpa Ss.96,97) / Decision Following Hearing (reasons Issued)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants were credible on central allegations
  2. 2 Whether claimants established persecution on a Convention ground
  3. 3 Whether claimants faced a personal risk of torture or risk to life or cruel and unusual treatment or punishment

Ratio Decidendi

The panel rejected the claims because the claimants' central allegations were found not credible, documentary evidence was weak or inconsistent and did not corroborate a profile that would attract state persecution; country evidence showed discrimination against Alevis but not persecution, and the claimants did not meet the standards for Convention refugee status or for risk of torture or death; therefore claims dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected: claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division denies the refugee protection claims; claims dismissed