MB9-02809

MB9-02809

On the balance of probabilities the Appellant failed to establish she would face a real risk of persecution or serious harm if relocated to Faisalabad: there is no credible evidence she is on a hit list, no proof of serious efforts by state or non‑state actors to find her since 2017, and she lacks a prominent profile that would attract retaliation; therefore a viable internal flight alternative exists and the RPD's refusal of protection is confirmed.

Citation
MB9-02809
Parties
Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX; Appellant: XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act) / RAD Decision (appeal Heard; Decision Rendered)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative (relocation), Blasphemy Laws and Persecution Risk, Credibility and Burden of Proof, Country Condition Evidence
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative (relocation) Blasphemy Laws and Persecution Risk Credibility and Burden of Proof Country Condition Evidence

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Appellant

XXXX XXXX

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal (refugee Appeal Division Under the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act) / RAD Decision (appeal Heard; Decision Rendered)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a viable internal flight alternative (Faisalabad) exists for the Appellant and family
  2. 2 Whether the Appellant is on a hit list or being actively sought by non‑state or state actors
  3. 3 Whether state authorities have formally accused or sought the Appellant for blasphemy

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the Appellant failed to establish she would face a real risk of persecution or serious harm if relocated to Faisalabad: there is no credible evidence she is on a hit list, no proof of serious efforts by state or non‑state actors to find her since 2017, and she lacks a prominent profile that would attract retaliation; therefore a viable internal flight alternative exists and the RPD's refusal of protection is confirmed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; decision of the Refugee Protection Division confirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed and RPD decision confirmed pursuant to subsection 111(1)(a) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act