TC0-07684

TC0-07684

The appeal is dismissed because on a full review the RPD correctly found the appellants are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection: country documents and evidence show Boko Haram lacks the means/motivation to pursue the appellants in Port Harcourt, the Principal Appellant does not match Boko Haram's typical target profile, the alleged incidents in Abeokuta (2012) and Ibadan (2017) are not proven on a balance of probabilities and lack corroboration, and relocation to Port Harcourt is not objectively unreasonable (satisfying both prongs of the IFA test).

Citation
TC0-07684
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 February 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (rad) / Decision on Appeal (reasons and Decision)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility Findings, State Protection, Profile of Persecutor Targets, Corroboration
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Country Conditions Counter‑terrorism Impact on Protection Internal Flight Alternative Credibility Findings State Protection Profile of Persecutor Targets +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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (rad) / Decision on Appeal (reasons and Decision)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the RPD erred in credibility findings regarding alleged attacks in 2012 and 2017
  2. 2 Whether Boko Haram has the means and motivation to pursue appellants in Port Harcourt (IFA)
  3. 3 Whether the Principal Appellant fits the profile of persons targeted by Boko Haram

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal is dismissed because on a full review the RPD correctly found the appellants are not Convention refugees or persons in need of protection: country documents and evidence show Boko Haram lacks the means/motivation to pursue the appellants in Port Harcourt, the Principal Appellant does not match Boko Haram's typical target profile, the alleged incidents in Abeokuta (2012) and Ibadan (2017) are not proven on a balance of probabilities and lack corroboration, and relocation to Port Harcourt is not objectively unreasonable (satisfying both prongs of the IFA test).

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed