TB8-19716

TB8-19716

The appeal is dismissed because material inconsistencies and gaps in the appellants' testimony undermine credibility on the central issue of whether the Secondary Appellant was being forced to take an Ogboni title; documentary evidence does not establish a generalized risk of forced membership or of FGM linked to such a title; consequently there is insufficient credible evidence that the appellants are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection, and the RPD decision is confirmed under s.111(1)(a) IRPA.

Citation
TB8-19716
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Secondary Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellants: XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX; Designated Representative: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent/minister: Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 January 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal to the Refugee Appeal Division / Decision on Appeal (dismissal)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed that the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under section 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act
Legal Topics
Credibility Assessment, Female Genital Mutilation, Forced Recruitment/membership, Admissibility of New Evidence, Oral Hearing Discretion, Documentary Evidence Evaluation
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Law Evidence Law Credibility Assessment Female Genital Mutilation Forced Recruitment/membership +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 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Secondary Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellants

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Designated Representative

Minister of Citizenship and Immigration

Respondent/minister

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal to the Refugee Appeal Division / Decision on Appeal (dismissal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was sufficient credible evidence that the Secondary Appellant was being forced to accept an Ogboni title
  2. 2 Whether female appellants face a risk of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) arising from the Ogboni allegations
  3. 3 Whether the minor son faces a risk of persecution or death

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because material inconsistencies and gaps in the appellants' testimony undermine credibility on the central issue of whether the Secondary Appellant was being forced to take an Ogboni title; documentary evidence does not establish a generalized risk of forced membership or of FGM linked to such a title; consequently there is insufficient credible evidence that the appellants are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection, and the RPD decision is confirmed under s.111(1)(a) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed that the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection under section 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and RPD decision confirmed
  • New evidence admitted on appeal but no oral hearing ordered