TA9-20896

TA9-20896

The claimant failed to establish his identity because the Resident Identity Card photograph was not that of the person before the panel and supporting documents lacked probative value; this destroyed the claimant's credibility and, when coupled with uncorroborated allegations and country evidence showing no serious risk to Christians in Guangxi, led to the conclusion on a balance of probabilities that he is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Citation
TA9-20896
Parties
Claimant: XXXXXXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Ss.96 & 97) / Decision Refugee Protection Division
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Identity Documents, Credibility Assessment, Persecution, Religious Persecution, Country Conditions, Document Authenticity, Warrants and Summons, Risk Assessment
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Religious Freedom Evidence Law Identity Documents Credibility Assessment +6 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 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXX

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Ss.96 & 97) / Decision Refugee Protection Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant established his identity
  2. 2 Whether the claimant's testimony that he was pursued by the Public Security Bureau is credible
  3. 3 Whether there is a serious possibility of persecution in Guangxi Province for practicing Christianity

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant failed to establish his identity because the Resident Identity Card photograph was not that of the person before the panel and supporting documents lacked probative value; this destroyed the claimant's credibility and, when coupled with uncorroborated allegations and country evidence showing no serious risk to Christians in Guangxi, led to the conclusion on a balance of probabilities that he is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the claimant's claim for refugee protection; decision dated June 15, 2011