TA9-08576

TA9-08576

On the evidence and authoritative country documentation, the Panel found that claimants failed to rebut the presumption that Colombia can provide adequate state protection; the FARC/ELN capacity is diminished and state security institutions are effective enough that the claimants do not face a serious possibility of persecution, torture, or risk to life on return. Therefore they are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection; the recusal application was denied for lack of reasonable apprehension of bias.

Citation
TA9-08576
Parties
Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (a.k.a. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX); Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
24 February 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Final Decision Following Hearing and Post Hearing Submissions (decision Dated February 24, 2011)
Outcome
Claims rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection; recusal application denied.
Legal Topics
State Protection, Convention Refugee Status, Nexus to Convention Grounds, Recusal and Apprehension of Bias, Burden of Proof and Credibility
Source Language
English
Immigration and Refugee Law Administrative Law Public International Law State Protection Convention Refugee Status Nexus to Convention Grounds Recusal and Apprehension of Bias Burden of Proof and Credibility

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX (a.k.a. XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX)

Claimant

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Final Decision Following Hearing and Post Hearing Submissions (decision Dated February 24, 2011)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection
  2. 2 Whether there is nexus between claimed harm and Convention grounds
  3. 3 Whether adequate state protection is available in Colombia

Ratio Decidendi

On the evidence and authoritative country documentation, the Panel found that claimants failed to rebut the presumption that Colombia can provide adequate state protection; the FARC/ELN capacity is diminished and state security institutions are effective enough that the claimants do not face a serious possibility of persecution, torture, or risk to life on return. Therefore they are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection; the recusal application was denied for lack of reasonable apprehension of bias.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection; recusal application denied.

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division denies refugee protection claims of the three claimants (decision dated February 24, 2011)
  • Panel denies claimants' post‑hearing application to recuse the Panel for apprehension of bias