MB8-27461

MB8-27461

Even assuming the appellants' allegations were credible, the RAD concluded the RPD correctly found viable internal flight alternatives in Benin City, Ibadan, and Port Harcourt: the first prong failed because there was no serious possibility of persecution by Delta State villagers in those cities and no evidence they could locate the appellants there; the second prong failed because relocation would not be unreasonable given language, education, and employment prospects and lack of evidence that generalized violence would make relocation unduly harsh.

Citation
MB8-27461
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 October 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Appeal Under IRPA / Refugee Appeal Division Decision on Appeal From Refugee Protection Division
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility Findings, Female Genital Mutilation (fgm), State Protection, Convention Refugee Status, Persons in Need of Protection
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Law Internal Flight Alternative Credibility Findings Female Genital Mutilation (fgm) State Protection Convention Refugee Status +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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Associate Appellant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Appeal Under IRPA / Refugee Appeal Division Decision on Appeal From Refugee Protection Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellants are Convention refugees or persons in need of protection
  2. 2 Whether a viable internal flight alternative (IFA) exists in Benin City, Ibadan, or Port Harcourt
  3. 3 Credibility of the appellants' testimony and documentary evidence

Ratio Decidendi

Even assuming the appellants' allegations were credible, the RAD concluded the RPD correctly found viable internal flight alternatives in Benin City, Ibadan, and Port Harcourt: the first prong failed because there was no serious possibility of persecution by Delta State villagers in those cities and no evidence they could locate the appellants there; the second prong failed because relocation would not be unreasonable given language, education, and employment prospects and lack of evidence that generalized violence would make relocation unduly harsh.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and RPD decision confirmed: appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA).