TA5-15817

TA5-15817

The claimant's multiple, material inconsistencies and lack of corroborating evidence destroyed her credibility on central facts (registration at gacaca courts and subsequent threats); absent credible evidence of individualized risk, the panel found no serious possibility of persecution, torture, or cruel and unusual treatment and therefore dismissed the claim under IRPA sections 96 and 97(1).

Citation
TA5-15817
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 December 2006
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division Determination)
Outcome
Claim denied; claimant is not a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Persecution, Credibility and Inconsistencies, Gacaca Courts, Risk of Torture/non Refoulement, Gender Sensitive Assessment
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Protection Human Rights Criminal Justice (gacaca Courts) Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Persecution Credibility and Inconsistencies +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 3 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division Determination)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is a Convention refugee
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is a person in need of protection under section 97(1) of IRPA
  3. 3 Whether the claimant faces a real risk for having registered to testify at gacaca courts

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's multiple, material inconsistencies and lack of corroborating evidence destroyed her credibility on central facts (registration at gacaca courts and subsequent threats); absent credible evidence of individualized risk, the panel found no serious possibility of persecution, torture, or cruel and unusual treatment and therefore dismissed the claim under IRPA sections 96 and 97(1).

Court Disposition

Claim denied; claimant is not a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection

Orders

  • Refugee protection claim is dismissed
  • Claimant's removal to Rwanda is not found to expose her to a risk of torture or cruel and unusual treatment (no protection granted)