MA7-04210

MA7-04210

Claim rejected because claimant did not establish nexus to a Convention ground leading to a serious possibility of persecution: documentary evidence and testimony showed forced recruitment is not systematic in his circumstances, his encounters were fortuitous and not evidence of being singled out above the general population, and no state agent persecuted him; thus risk is generalized and insufficient under ss.96 and 97(1)(b) IRPA.

Citation
MA7-04210
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Claimant's Counsel: Me Cristina Marinelli; Decision Maker: Roxane Cyr; Tribunal Officer: Catherine Brisebois
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 November 2009
Procedural Posture
Refugee Claim Refugee Protection Division / Decision After Hearing
Outcome
Claim for refugee protection rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, Convention Refugee, Particular Social Group, Forced Recruitment, Gangs, Generalized Risk, Persecution
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Human Rights Law Refugee Protection Convention Refugee Particular Social Group Forced Recruitment Gangs +2 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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Me Cristina Marinelli

Claimant's Counsel

Roxane Cyr

Decision Maker

Catherine Brisebois

Tribunal Officer

Procedural Posture

Refugee Claim Refugee Protection Division / Decision After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant's fear of forced gang recruitment engages a Convention ground
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is a member of a particular social group (young men)
  3. 3 Whether there is a serious possibility of persecution on return

Ratio Decidendi

Claim rejected because claimant did not establish nexus to a Convention ground leading to a serious possibility of persecution: documentary evidence and testimony showed forced recruitment is not systematic in his circumstances, his encounters were fortuitous and not evidence of being singled out above the general population, and no state agent persecuted him; thus risk is generalized and insufficient under ss.96 and 97(1)(b) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claim for refugee protection rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection.