TB5-03699

TB5-03699

Although the claimants were found generally credible about threats and extortion by persons identifying as FARC, they made no efforts to report threats or seek protection from Colombian authorities; objective country documentation shows Colombia has functioning institutions and programs capable of providing protection; the claimants failed to rebut the presumption of state protection by clear and convincing evidence; therefore they are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Citation
TB5-03699
Parties
Principal Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Spouse (male Claimant): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Son (child Claimant): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Daughter (minor Claimant): XXXX XXXX XXXX; Daughter (minor Claimant): XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 June 2015
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision on Merits (reasons and Decision Issued)
Outcome
Claims rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
State Protection, Credible Testimony, Extortion, Kidnapping, Convention Refugee Status, Persons in Need of Protection
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law State Protection Credible Testimony Extortion Kidnapping Convention Refugee Status +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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Principal Claimant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Spouse (male Claimant)

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Son (child Claimant)

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Daughter (minor Claimant)

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Daughter (minor Claimant)

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Under Immigration and Refugee Protection Act / Decision on Merits (reasons and Decision Issued)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants qualify as Convention refugees
  2. 2 Whether the claimants are persons in need of protection
  3. 3 Whether state protection in Colombia was available and effective

Ratio Decidendi

Although the claimants were found generally credible about threats and extortion by persons identifying as FARC, they made no efforts to report threats or seek protection from Colombian authorities; objective country documentation shows Colombia has functioning institutions and programs capable of providing protection; the claimants failed to rebut the presumption of state protection by clear and convincing evidence; therefore they are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected; claimants are neither Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Claims rejected; not Convention refugees nor persons in need of protection.