MA8-16729

MA8-16729

The claimants failed to discharge the evidentiary and credibility burden: there was no objective evidence that the husband was a member of a persecuted political party or that authorities still sought former members, significant unexplained delay and inconsistent conduct undermined fear claims, and no showing that state protection was unavailable for the child; therefore there is no serious possibility of persecution and the claim is rejected.

Citation
MA8-16729
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXX; Minor Claimant: XXXXXX XXXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 September 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Ss.96 and 97(1)) / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Refugee protection claim rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Forced Marriage, Gender Related Persecution, Political Opinion, Domestic Violence, Detention, Persecution by Family Members, Credibility, Evidence of Political Membership, State Protection for Children, Change in Country Circumstances
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Forced Marriage Gender Related Persecution Political Opinion Domestic Violence Detention +5 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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXX XXXXXX XXXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXXXX XXXXX XXXX

Minor Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (irpa Ss.96 and 97(1)) / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimants are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection
  2. 2 Whether claimant faces persecution for political opinion or membership through association with husband
  3. 3 Whether claimant faces persecution or forced marriage by family on social group/sex ground

Ratio Decidendi

The claimants failed to discharge the evidentiary and credibility burden: there was no objective evidence that the husband was a member of a persecuted political party or that authorities still sought former members, significant unexplained delay and inconsistent conduct undermined fear claims, and no showing that state protection was unavailable for the child; therefore there is no serious possibility of persecution and the claim is rejected.

Court Disposition

Refugee protection claim rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection

Orders

  • Refugee protection claim rejected