TB6-19157

TB6-19157

The Member found the claimant's amendment and family letter not credible and there was no reliable evidence that the 2016 attackers were members of extremist groups capable of tracking the claimant nationwide; therefore the risk of persecution on return was not established on the balance of probabilities and Islamabad was a reasonable and accessible internal flight alternative, leading to rejection of the refugee claim under sections 96 and 97(1).

Citation
TB6-19157
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Counsel for Claimant: Mohay Laurea; Respondent: Minister's Counsel; Member (adjudicator): David Young
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
5 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Refugee Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Oral Hearing With Oral Reasons Rendered; Written Reasons to Follow
Outcome
Claimant's refugee claim rejected (not a Convention refugee / not in need of protection)
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, Convention Refugee Status, Persecution for Religion, Credibility Assessment, Country Conditions, Late Disclosure
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Asylum Law Internal Flight Alternative Convention Refugee Status Persecution for Religion Credibility Assessment Country Conditions +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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Claimant

Mohay Laurea

Counsel for Claimant

Minister's Counsel

Respondent

David Young

Member (adjudicator)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Claim Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Oral Hearing With Oral Reasons Rendered; Written Reasons to Follow

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant is a Convention refugee or person in need of protection under sections 96 and 97(1) of the IRPA
  2. 2 Whether Karachi or Islamabad constitute reasonable internal flight alternatives (IFA)
  3. 3 Credibility of the claimant's amended narrative and supporting family letters

Ratio Decidendi

The Member found the claimant's amendment and family letter not credible and there was no reliable evidence that the 2016 attackers were members of extremist groups capable of tracking the claimant nationwide; therefore the risk of persecution on return was not established on the balance of probabilities and Islamabad was a reasonable and accessible internal flight alternative, leading to rejection of the refugee claim under sections 96 and 97(1).

Court Disposition

Claimant's refugee claim rejected (not a Convention refugee / not in need of protection)