TB2-14775

TB2-14775

The claimant's evidence failed credibility assessment on whether he is a genuine Falun Gong practitioner and failed to prove he is sought by the PSB; documentary and case-specific facts (including his ability to depart China using his passport and evidence that family relocation to Shandong reduced local harassment) establish an available internal flight alternative; therefore he did not meet the statutory burden under sections 96 and 97(1) of IRPA and his claim is denied.

Citation
TB2-14775
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
13 August 2018
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (irpa) / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Claim denied; claimant is not a Convention refugee and is not a person in need of protection under sections 96 and 97(1) of IRPA.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, Person in Need of Protection, Credibility Assessment, Internal Flight Alternative, Persecution of Falun Gong Practitioners
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Convention Refugee Person in Need of Protection Credibility Assessment Internal Flight Alternative +1 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 4 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is a genuine Falun Gong practitioner
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is sought by the Public Security Bureau (PSB) and faces a real risk of persecution
  3. 3 Whether an internal flight alternative (IFA) exists within China

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant's evidence failed credibility assessment on whether he is a genuine Falun Gong practitioner and failed to prove he is sought by the PSB; documentary and case-specific facts (including his ability to depart China using his passport and evidence that family relocation to Shandong reduced local harassment) establish an available internal flight alternative; therefore he did not meet the statutory burden under sections 96 and 97(1) of IRPA and his claim is denied.

Court Disposition

Claim denied; claimant is not a Convention refugee and is not a person in need of protection under sections 96 and 97(1) of IRPA.

Orders

  • Claim denied