2022 RLLR 54

2022 RLLR 54

On the balance of probabilities the principal and associate claimants face a serious possibility of persecution in India because of their real or imputed political opinion as anti-drug activists and the minor faces a serious possibility of persecution by virtue of his familial relationship; objective country evidence and the claimants' evidence show state protection is inadequate and no viable internal flight alternative exists because authorities and drug actors are motivated and possess means (databases, biometric systems, local contacts) to locate them, therefore they qualify as convention refugees under Section 96 IRPA.

Citation
2022 RLLR 54
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Claimant (spouse): XXXX XXXX; Minor Claimant (son): XXXX XXXX
Court
Royal Canadian Mounted Police Labour Relations
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
6 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Refugee Claim / Decision (refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Claimants are found to be convention refugees pursuant to Section 96 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
Legal Topics
Persecution, Internal Flight Alternative, State Protection, Political Opinion (imputed), Particular Social Group, Credibility Assessment, Country Conditions
Source Language
English
Immigration and Refugee Protection Refugee Law Human Rights Law Administrative Law Persecution Internal Flight Alternative State Protection Political Opinion (imputed) +3 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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXX XXXX

Associate Claimant (spouse)

XXXX XXXX

Minor Claimant (son)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Claim / Decision (refugee Protection Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants are convention refugees under Section 96 IRPA
  2. 2 Whether there is nexus between feared harm and a Convention ground (political opinion, membership in a particular social group)
  3. 3 Whether adequate state protection is available in India

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the principal and associate claimants face a serious possibility of persecution in India because of their real or imputed political opinion as anti-drug activists and the minor faces a serious possibility of persecution by virtue of his familial relationship; objective country evidence and the claimants' evidence show state protection is inadequate and no viable internal flight alternative exists because authorities and drug actors are motivated and possess means (databases, biometric systems, local contacts) to locate them, therefore they qualify as convention refugees under Section 96 IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claimants are found to be convention refugees pursuant to Section 96 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

Orders

  • Claimants are recognized as convention refugees pursuant to Section 96 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.