MA9-11750

MA9-11750

The claim was rejected because, on the balance of probabilities, the claimant's asserted identity as a DRC citizen was not credible: fingerprint evidence links him to an Angolan identity, documentary evidence and expert analysis show irregularities indicative of fraud in the DRC passport and supporting documents, and the claimant failed to provide satisfactory explanations for inconsistencies (including maintenance of an alternate Facebook identity and memory lapses); because he is likely an Angolan citizen and does not claim fear of Angola, he is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Citation
MA9-11750
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim (convention Refugee and Person in Need of Protection) / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division)
Outcome
Claim rejected; claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Identity and Credibility, Convention Refugee Determination, Person in Need of Protection (s.97), Biometric Evidence (fingerprints), Document Authenticity, Membership in Particular Social Group (fungafrica)
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Nationality and Identity Document Fraud Evidence and Credibility Identity and Credibility Convention Refugee Determination Person in Need of Protection (s.97) Biometric Evidence (fingerprints) +2 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 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim (convention Refugee and Person in Need of Protection) / Hearing and Decision (refugee Protection Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee based on political opinion and membership in Fungafrica
  2. 2 Whether claimant is a person in need of protection (risk of torture, risk to life, cruel and unusual treatment) under s.97(1)
  3. 3 Whether the claimant's asserted identity as a DRC citizen is credible

Ratio Decidendi

The claim was rejected because, on the balance of probabilities, the claimant's asserted identity as a DRC citizen was not credible: fingerprint evidence links him to an Angolan identity, documentary evidence and expert analysis show irregularities indicative of fraud in the DRC passport and supporting documents, and the claimant failed to provide satisfactory explanations for inconsistencies (including maintenance of an alternate Facebook identity and memory lapses); because he is likely an Angolan citizen and does not claim fear of Angola, he is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

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