TA9-06559

TA9-06559

The claimant can obtain Moroccan citizenship by straightforward registration through his mother and thus Morocco is a country of reference; the claimant failed to prove a well‑founded fear of persecution in Morocco (credibility concerns regarding late disclosure and lack of corroboration), and because a citizen must show risk in each country of citizenship, the claim fails. Therefore the claimant is neither a Convention refugee under s.96 nor a person in need of protection under s.97(1) IRPA.

Citation
TA9-06559
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
25 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Redetermination / Reasons and Decision (redetermination)
Outcome
Claim denied. Claimant is not a Convention refugee under section 96 IRPA and is not a person in need of protection under section 97(1) IRPA.
Legal Topics
Country of Reference, State Protection, Internal Flight Alternative, Credibility, Acquisition of Citizenship, Convention Refugee Status, Person in Need of Protection
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Nationality Law Administrative Law Country of Reference State Protection Internal Flight Alternative Credibility +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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Redetermination / Reasons and Decision (redetermination)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Morocco is a country of reference by virtue of available Moroccan citizenship
  2. 2 Whether the claimant faces a well‑founded fear of persecution in Morocco or Pakistan
  3. 3 Whether the claimant is a Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant can obtain Moroccan citizenship by straightforward registration through his mother and thus Morocco is a country of reference; the claimant failed to prove a well‑founded fear of persecution in Morocco (credibility concerns regarding late disclosure and lack of corroboration), and because a citizen must show risk in each country of citizenship, the claim fails. Therefore the claimant is neither a Convention refugee under s.96 nor a person in need of protection under s.97(1) IRPA.

Court Disposition

Claim denied. Claimant is not a Convention refugee under section 96 IRPA and is not a person in need of protection under section 97(1) IRPA.

Orders

  • Refugee claim dismissed.
  • No protection granted under sections 96 and 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.