MA9-08837

MA9-08837

The claimant was exposed to generalized criminal violence and extortion but failed to prove persecution for a Convention ground or that state protection or relocation within Mexico was unreasonable; an internal flight alternative (Mexico City) was available; therefore claimant did not satisfy ss.96 or 97(1) IRPA and the claim is dismissed.

Citation
MA9-08837
Parties
Claimant: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX; Adjudicator: Aimable Ndejuru; Tribunal Officer: Anne Bardin; Respondent: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 November 2011
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection (irpa Ss.96,97) / Decision (rpd Hearing)
Outcome
Claim for refugee protection denied
Legal Topics
Refugee Protection, Persecution of a Family Member, Extortion, Organized Crime, Internal Flight Alternative, Generalized Violence, Burden of Proof
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Criminal Law Refugee Protection Persecution of a Family Member Extortion Organized Crime +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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

Aimable Ndejuru

Adjudicator

Anne Bardin

Tribunal Officer

Minister

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection (irpa Ss.96,97) / Decision (rpd Hearing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether claimant is a Convention refugee under s.96 IRPA or a person in need of protection under s.97(1) IRPA
  2. 2 Whether the harm alleged amounts to persecution linked to a Convention ground
  3. 3 Whether state protection in Mexico was unavailable or ineffective

Ratio Decidendi

The claimant was exposed to generalized criminal violence and extortion but failed to prove persecution for a Convention ground or that state protection or relocation within Mexico was unreasonable; an internal flight alternative (Mexico City) was available; therefore claimant did not satisfy ss.96 or 97(1) IRPA and the claim is dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claim for refugee protection denied

Orders

  • Claim dismissed (negative decision on refugee protection), dated November 2, 2011