Gebreab v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness)

Gebreab v. Canada (Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness) Court (s) Database Federal Court of Appeal Decisions Date 2010-10-19 Neutral citation 2010 FCA 274 File numbers A-481-09 Decision Content Federal Court of Appeal CANADA Cour d'appel fédérale Date: 20101019 Docket: A-481-09 Citation: 2010 FCA 274 CORAM: NOËL J.A. SHARLOW J.A. LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.A. BETWEEN: BEKELE MENGISTU GEBREAB Appellant and THE MINISTER OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS Respondent Heard at Vancouver, British Columbia, on October 19, 2010. Judgment delivered from the Bench at Vancouver, British Columbia, on October 19, 2010. REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT BY: LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.A. Federal Court of Appeal CANADA Cour d'appel fédérale Date: 20101019 Docket: A-481-09 Citation: 2010 FCA 274 CORAM: NOËL J.A. SHARLOW J.A. LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.A. BETWEEN: BEKELE MENGISTU GEBREAB Appellant and THE MINISTER OF PUBLIC SAFETY AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Vancouver, British Columbia, on October 19, 2010) LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.A. [1] The appellant is appealing the judgment of Justice Snider (2009 FC 1213) in which she dismissed his application for judicial review under the provisions of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27 (IRPA) and certified the following question: Is a foreign national inadmissible to Canada, pursuant to s. 34(1)(f)of IRPA, where there is clear and convincing evidence that the organization disavowed and ceased its engagement in acts of subversion or terrorism as contemplated by s. 34(1)(b) and (c) prior to the foreign national’s membership in the organization? [2] The appellant’s membership in the Ethiopian Peoples’ Revolutionary Party (EPRP) was conceded. Justice Snider concluded that the Immigration Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (the Board) correctly identified and applied the test for determining whether the EPRP of the 1970s was an organization within the meaning of subsection 34(1) of the IRPA. Once the Board had established that the EPRP of the 1970s was such an organization, the question whether the EPRP of the 1980s was the same organization, a highly factual determination, was subject to review on a standard of review of reasonableness. Justice Snider found the Board’s decision that the “EPRP was a single, continuously-existent political organization from the [1970s] through the time of [the appellant’s] membership and beyond” to be reasonable. We are in agreement with that conclusion for substantially the reasons given by her. [3] Consequently, the appeal will be dismissed and the certified question will be answered as follows: It is not a requirement for inadmissibility under s. 34(1)(f) of the IRPA that the dates of an individual’s membership in the organization correspond with the dates on which that organization committed acts of terrorism or subversion by force. “Carolyn Layden-Stevenson” J.A. FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: A-481-09 STYLE OF CAUSE: BEKELE MENGISTU GEBREAB V. MPSEP PLACE OF HEARING: Vancouver, British Columbia DATE OF HEARING: October 19, 2010 REASONS FOR JUDGMENT NOËL J.A. OF THE COURT BY: SHARLOW J.A. LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.A. DELIVERED FROM THE BENCH BY: LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.A. APPEARANCES: Rod Holloway Eric Purtzki FOR THE APPELLANT Keith Reimer FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Legal Services Society Vancouver, British Columbia FOR THE APPELLANT Myles J. Kirvan Deputy Attorney General of Canada FOR THE RESPONDENT