TA5-06789

TA5-06789

Because the claimant is a national of a democratic state that has functioning institutions and documented, serious anti-gang efforts, and because the claimant did not reasonably attempt to avail himself of available state protection, he failed to provide clear and convincing proof that state protection was unavailable; therefore he is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Citation
TA5-06789
Parties
Claimant: XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX; Respondent: Refugee Protection Officer; Minister's Counsel: Minister
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 January 2007
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Decision (refused)
Outcome
Refugee claim rejected; claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.
Legal Topics
State Protection, Persecution, Gang Violence, Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies, Country Conditions, Burden of Proof
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Criminal Law State Protection Persecution Gang Violence Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies +2 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 5 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX

Claimant

Refugee Protection Officer

Respondent

Minister

Minister's Counsel

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under IRPA / Hearing and Decision (refused)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether adequate state protection exists in El Salvador for the claimant
  2. 2 Whether the claimant exhausted domestic remedies prior to seeking international protection
  3. 3 Whether the claimant faces a risk of persecution, danger to life, torture or cruel treatment by state or non-state actors

Ratio Decidendi

Because the claimant is a national of a democratic state that has functioning institutions and documented, serious anti-gang efforts, and because the claimant did not reasonably attempt to avail himself of available state protection, he failed to provide clear and convincing proof that state protection was unavailable; therefore he is not a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Refugee claim rejected; claimant is neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection.

Orders

  • Refugee Protection Division rejects the claim for refugee protection