MA6-04642

The panel found the claimants did not have an objectively well‑founded fear of persecution and, in any event, an internal flight alternative within Mexico was available given the country's size and population and the claimant's conduct (delay and relocation within country), therefore the claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation: MA6-04642
Parties: Principal Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Minor Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Minor Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX
Court: Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction: Canada
Judgment Date: 25 August 2008
Procedural Posture: Refugee Protection / Hearing and Decision
Outcome: Claims for refugee protection rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics: Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility, Delay in Leaving Country, Harassment, Political Movement, Children
Source Language: English

Immigration Refugee Protection Human Rights Internal Flight Alternative Credibility Delay in Leaving Country Harassment Political Movement +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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Minor Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Minor Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection / Hearing and Decision

Legal Issues

1 Whether claimants are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection
2 Whether an internal flight alternative (IFA) is available
3 Whether the death threats were credible and constituted a well-founded fear

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Claims for refugee protection rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.