CA5-00656

CA5-00656

The claim is rejected because the claimant's testimony was general and lacked the expected detail, he failed to produce reliable corroborative evidence despite opportunity and counsel, and the panel accepted the Minister's statutory declaration as significant evidence that the claimant contrived his political involvement; on that basis the claimant did not meet his burden to demonstrate a serious possibility of persecution or a real risk of torture or other cruel and unusual treatment on return.

Citation
CA5-00656
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
20 September 2006
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Hearing Decision (refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection under sections 96 and 97(1) of IRPA.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee Determination, Persecution, Political Opinion, Ethnicity (kurd), Religion (alevi), Credibility and Corroboration, Minister's Intervention, Statutory Declaration, Return and Removal
Source Language
English
Refugee Protection Immigration Law Human Rights Convention Refugee Determination Persecution Political Opinion Ethnicity (kurd) Religion (alevi) +4 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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Hearing Decision (refugee Protection Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant was credible regarding alleged political activity and detention
  2. 2 Whether claimant established a well-founded fear of persecution on grounds of political opinion, race (Kurd) or religion (Alevi)
  3. 3 Whether claimant would more likely than not face torture, death or cruel and unusual treatment on return

Ratio Decidendi

The claim is rejected because the claimant's testimony was general and lacked the expected detail, he failed to produce reliable corroborative evidence despite opportunity and counsel, and the panel accepted the Minister's statutory declaration as significant evidence that the claimant contrived his political involvement; on that basis the claimant did not meet his burden to demonstrate a serious possibility of persecution or a real risk of torture or other cruel and unusual treatment on return.

Court Disposition

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

Orders

  • Claim rejected; claimant is not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection under sections 96 and 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (Decision dated September 20, 2006).