VB9-08166

VB9-08166

The RAD confirmed the RPD: the Appellants failed to establish an objective basis for a fear of persecution relating to FGM or other serious harm from the extended family, society or Boko Haram; the evidence shows parents can refuse FGM with few consequences and there is no proof of concrete steps or sufficient motivation by the family to force FGM; therefore the Appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under ss.96 and 97(1) IRPA and the appeal is dismissed.

Citation
VB9-08166
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Dependent Minor Daughter: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Dependent Minor Son: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
10 January 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal to the Refugee Appeal Division From Refugee Protection Division Negative Determination / Reasons and Decision on Appeal (independent Assessment; Correctness Standard Applied)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed that the Appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Female Genital Mutilation (fgm), Convention Refugee Determination, Objective Risk Assessment, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Nexus to Particular Social Group
Source Language
English
Refugee Law Immigration Law Human Rights Gender‑based Violence Female Genital Mutilation (fgm) Convention Refugee Determination Objective Risk Assessment State Protection +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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Dependent Minor Daughter

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Dependent Minor Son

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal to the Refugee Appeal Division From Refugee Protection Division Negative Determination / Reasons and Decision on Appeal (independent Assessment; Correctness Standard Applied)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there is an objective basis for the Appellants' fear of persecution relating to FGM
  2. 2 Whether the extended family would take serious action to force FGM contrary to parents' wishes
  3. 3 Whether the Appellants face persecution by Boko Haram or society at large

Ratio Decidendi

The RAD confirmed the RPD: the Appellants failed to establish an objective basis for a fear of persecution relating to FGM or other serious harm from the extended family, society or Boko Haram; the evidence shows parents can refuse FGM with few consequences and there is no proof of concrete steps or sufficient motivation by the family to force FGM; therefore the Appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under ss.96 and 97(1) IRPA and the appeal is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed that the Appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection

Orders

  • Pursuant to section 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, the Refugee Appeal Division confirms the RPD decision and dismisses the appeal