MB9-22375

MB9-22375

On an independent review, the RAD finds the RPD did not err: appellants failed to prove agents could trace them in Abuja or that social media use would expose them; gender-based risks and socioeconomic factors do not establish a serious possibility of persecution given family support and objective evidence; therefore Abuja is a viable and reasonable IFA and the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection, so the appeal is dismissed under s.111(1)(a) IRPA.

Citation
MB9-22375
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Co Appellant (adult Daughter): XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
3 September 2020
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division (rad) Under IRPA / Decision on Appeal (reasons and Dismissal)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative (ifa), Convention Refugee Definition, Risk of Persecution, Gender Based Persecution, Admissibility of New Evidence, Oral Hearing Criteria, Use of Jurisprudential Guides
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Human Rights Internal Flight Alternative (ifa) Convention Refugee Definition Risk of Persecution Gender Based Persecution +3 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 6 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Co Appellant (adult Daughter)

XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal to Refugee Appeal Division (rad) Under IRPA / Decision on Appeal (reasons and Dismissal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appellants face a risk of persecution or other protection grounds if returned to Nigeria
  2. 2 Whether a viable and reasonable internal flight alternative exists in Abuja
  3. 3 Whether the minor appellant faces risk in his country of nationality (USA)

Ratio Decidendi

On an independent review, the RAD finds the RPD did not err: appellants failed to prove agents could trace them in Abuja or that social media use would expose them; gender-based risks and socioeconomic factors do not establish a serious possibility of persecution given family support and objective evidence; therefore Abuja is a viable and reasonable IFA and the appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection, so the appeal is dismissed under s.111(1)(a) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; RPD decision confirmed that appellants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed pursuant to section 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act; RPD decision dated August 30, 2019 confirmed