MA4-07039

MA4-07039

The claim is rejected because the claimant failed to meet his burden of proof: his allegations were not credible due to inconsistencies and omissions, he produced no corroborating evidence of conversion or presence in Iran in 2003-2004, he destroyed travel documents and did not seek protection in transit countries, and documentary evidence shows ordinary converts would not likely be targeted absent deeper involvement; therefore he is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection against torture or death.

Citation
MA4-07039
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX; Claimant's Counsel: Me Maria Houem; Refugee Protection Officer: Galia Rouleau-Dumont; Decision Maker: Diane Fecteau
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 September 2005
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Decision at Refugee Protection Division
Outcome
Claim for refugee protection rejected
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, Convention Refugee, Persecution for Religion, Freedom of Religion, Credibility Assessment, Destruction of Travel Documents, Failure to Seek Protection in Transit Countries, Risk of Torture/ill Treatment
Source Language
English
Refugee Law Immigration Law Human Rights Law Refugee Protection Convention Refugee Persecution for Religion Freedom of Religion Credibility Assessment +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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Me Maria Houem

Claimant's Counsel

Galia Rouleau-Dumont

Refugee Protection Officer

Diane Fecteau

Decision Maker

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Decision at Refugee Protection Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant genuinely converted to Mormonism and engaged in activities that would expose him to persecution in Iran
  2. 2 Whether claimant established subjective and objective fear of persecution or risk of torture/cruel treatment on return
  3. 3 Whether claimant's credibility and evidence meet the burden of proof

Ratio Decidendi

The claim is rejected because the claimant failed to meet his burden of proof: his allegations were not credible due to inconsistencies and omissions, he produced no corroborating evidence of conversion or presence in Iran in 2003-2004, he destroyed travel documents and did not seek protection in transit countries, and documentary evidence shows ordinary converts would not likely be targeted absent deeper involvement; therefore he is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection against torture or death.

Court Disposition

Claim for refugee protection rejected

Orders

  • Claim for refugee protection is rejected.