TB0-17423

TB0-17423

The Board found the claimants failed both the subjective and objective components required for refugee protection: the principal claimant's conduct and evasive explanations undermined a genuine subjective fear, objective country evidence showed forced recruitment is rare and FARC capacity diminished, and on balance the claimants have a reasonable internal flight alternative in Bogota; accordingly they are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation
TB0-17423
Parties
Principal Claimant / Designated Representative: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Minor Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (a.k.a. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX)
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
4 April 2012
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision by Refugee Protection Division (reasons and Determination)
Outcome
Claim dismissed; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Convention Refugee Status, Persecution, Forced Recruitment, Credibility Assessment, Country Conditions
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative Convention Refugee Status Persecution Forced Recruitment Credibility Assessment +1 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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Principal Claimant / Designated Representative

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (a.k.a. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX)

Minor Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision by Refugee Protection Division (reasons and Determination)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants have a well‑founded fear of persecution (s.96 IRPA)
  2. 2 Whether claimants would face a risk of serious harm on return (s.97 IRPA)
  3. 3 Whether an Internal Flight Alternative (IFA) in Bogota is available and reasonable

Ratio Decidendi

The Board found the claimants failed both the subjective and objective components required for refugee protection: the principal claimant's conduct and evasive explanations undermined a genuine subjective fear, objective country evidence showed forced recruitment is rare and FARC capacity diminished, and on balance the claimants have a reasonable internal flight alternative in Bogota; accordingly they are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Refugee protection claim denied
  • Claimants can return to Bogota; no protection granted