TA8-09015

TA8-09015

The principal claimant is a Convention refugee because credible evidence established nexus to political opinion and that state protection and internal relocation would be inadequate given documented ELN activity and the kidnapping incident; the male and female claimants failed to rebut the presumption of state protection with clear and convincing evidence and therefore are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under s.97.

Citation
TA8-09015
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Male Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Female Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Decision of the Refugee Protection Division (final Determination)
Outcome
Principal claimant (XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX) is found to be a Convention refugee. Male claimant (XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX) and female claimant (XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX) are found not to be Convention refugees and not to be persons in need of protection under ss.96-97 IRPA.
Legal Topics
Persecution for Political Opinion, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Risk of Torture, Risk to Life/cruel and Unusual Treatment
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law Persecution for Political Opinion State Protection Internal Flight Alternative Risk of Torture Risk to Life/cruel and Unusual Treatment

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Male Claimant

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Female Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Decision of the Refugee Protection Division (final Determination)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants rebutted the presumption of state protection
  2. 2 Whether claimants have a well-founded fear of persecution on a Convention ground (political opinion)
  3. 3 Whether claimants meet the threshold for protection under s.97(1) (torture or risk to life/cruel and unusual treatment)

Ratio Decidendi

The principal claimant is a Convention refugee because credible evidence established nexus to political opinion and that state protection and internal relocation would be inadequate given documented ELN activity and the kidnapping incident; the male and female claimants failed to rebut the presumption of state protection with clear and convincing evidence and therefore are not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under s.97.

Court Disposition

Principal claimant (XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX) is found to be a Convention refugee. Male claimant (XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX) and female claimant (XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX) are found not to be Convention refugees and not to be persons in need of protection under ss.96-97 IRPA.

Orders

  • Claim of XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX is accepted: granted refugee protection as a Convention refugee.
  • Claims of XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX and XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX are rejected: not Convention refugees and not persons in need of protection under ss.96-97 IRPA.