MB5-01791

MB5-01791

Panel found claimant not credible on key allegations, claimant failed to rebut presumption of effective state protection, and Bogotá constituted a viable internal flight alternative; therefore there was no serious possibility of persecution nor, on the balance of probabilities, a real risk of torture, death or cruel and unusual treatment, so the claim was rejected.

Citation
MB5-01791
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
14 October 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Decision
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection
Legal Topics
Credibility, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Persecution, Extortion by Non State Actors
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Administrative Law Credibility State Protection Internal Flight Alternative Persecution Extortion by Non State Actors

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

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is credible regarding alleged FARC extortion and threats
  2. 2 Whether state protection in Colombia was available and effective
  3. 3 Whether an internal flight alternative (Bogotá) was viable

Ratio Decidendi

Panel found claimant not credible on key allegations, claimant failed to rebut presumption of effective state protection, and Bogotá constituted a viable internal flight alternative; therefore there was no serious possibility of persecution nor, on the balance of probabilities, a real risk of torture, death or cruel and unusual treatment, so the claim was rejected.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection