AA1-01391

AA1-01391

The headscarf ban and associated questioning/harassment constitute discrimination but do not rise to persecution because they do not deny first or second level fundamental rights nor show severe, persistent, on-going harassment; university education is not a basic human right whose denial equals persecution; therefore claimant is not a Convention refugee and not in need of protection.

Citation
AA1-01391
Parties
Claimant: XXXXXXXXXX; Claimant's Counsel: Karla Unger; Refugee Protection Officer: Jérôme Ruault; Panel Member: Eunice Harker
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
27 May 2003
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim / Hearing and Decision on Claim (final Determination)
Outcome
Claim rejected; not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Religion, Political Opinion, Membership of a Particular Social Group, Gender Related Persecution, Discrimination Vs Persecution, State Secularism, Education Rights, Risk of Torture
Source Language
English
Immigration Refugee Law Human Rights Administrative Law International Law Religion Political Opinion Membership of a Particular Social Group +5 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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXXXXXXXX

Claimant

Karla Unger

Claimant's Counsel

Jérôme Ruault

Refugee Protection Officer

Eunice Harker

Panel Member

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim / Hearing and Decision on Claim (final Determination)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether membership in or following Fethullah Gülen amounted to persecution
  2. 2 Whether prohibition on wearing headscarf in state universities and institutions constitutes persecution or mere discrimination
  3. 3 Whether denial of university education or state employment is a denial of a basic human right amounting to persecution

Ratio Decidendi

The headscarf ban and associated questioning/harassment constitute discrimination but do not rise to persecution because they do not deny first or second level fundamental rights nor show severe, persistent, on-going harassment; university education is not a basic human right whose denial equals persecution; therefore claimant is not a Convention refugee and not in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claim rejected; not a Convention refugee and not a person in need of protection.

Orders

  • Refugee claim dismissed; claimant's request for refugee protection denied