Liang v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

Liang v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
Court (s) Database
Federal Court Decisions
Date
2003-10-03
Neutral citation
2003 FC 1140
File numbers
IMM-4943-02
Decision Content
Date: 20031003
Docket: IMM-4943-02
Citation: 2003 FC 1140
Ottawa, Ontario, this 3rd day of October, 2003
Present: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE O'REILLY
BETWEEN:
XIU YIN LIANG
(a.k.a. Xiuyin Liang)
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT AND JUDGMENT
[1] Xiu Yin Liang sought refugee status in Canada, claiming that he fled China in 2001 to escape persecution for practising Falun Gong. A panel of the Immigration and Refugee Board found his story of fear and flight from China to be unsupported by credible evidence and dismissed his claim. It concluded that Mr. Liang came to Canada with an ulterior motive. Mr. Liang argues that the Board made four serious errors and asks, by way of this application for judicial review, for a new hearing.
[2] I can find no error in the Board's analysis of the evidence and, therefore, cannot grant Mr. Liang's request.
[3] Mr. Liang argues first that the Board erred when it found that his knowledge of Falun Gong was not that of a genuine devotee. For example, he was unfamiliar with the practice of reciting verses during exercises. Mr. Liang suggests that the Board came to a faulty conclusion in that it failed to cite any documentary evidence to support it.
[4] The Board had documentary evidence before it against which to measure Mr. Liang's testimony. The Board questioned Mr. Liang on the basis of that evidence, and gave him a clear opportunity to address its concerns. Further, the Board cited Mr. Liang's lack of knowledge about the practice of reciting verses merely as an example of his unfamiliarity with Falun Gong. The evidence also disclosed other grounds for the Board's finding that his knowledge was poor. In light of this evidence, the Board's finding was reasonable.
[5] Mr. Liang also questioned the Board's grounds for doubting his description of his exit from China. He claimed to have obtained a passport and an exit visa in his own name at the same time as security authorities were allegedly searching for him.
[6] The Board thought this was an unlikely scenario. It felt that if Chinese authorities were genuinely interested in Mr. Liang, they would have apprehended him or curtailed his freedom to leave the country. The Board was clearly entitled to draw this inference: Yu v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2003 FTC 720, [2003] F.C.J. No. 932 (QL)( T.D.), at para. 14.
[7] Third, Mr. Liang challenged the Board's dissatisfaction with his various explanations for delaying his application for refugee status in Canada. In total, Mr. Liang gave six different reasons, most of them unconnected to the questions put to him or at odds with other evidence. In my view, the Board's treatment of Mr. Liang's evidence in this area was sound.
[8] Finally, Mr. Liang disputes the Board's reliance on his demeanour as a basis on which to discredit his testimony. The Board found Mr. Liang's evidence to be less than direct. It did not, however, refer to any specific examples. I agree that fact-finders must take great care before discounting a witness's evidence based on his or her behaviour. However, looking at the Board's reasons as a whole, I see no basis for the argument that the Board assessed Mr. Liang's testimony unfairly. It was entitled to take into account the manner in which Mr. Liang delivered his testimony, along with the rest of the evidence, as one of the relevant factors in deciding the claim.
[9] Accordingly, I must dismiss this application for judicial review. Neither party proposed a question of general importance for me to certify, and none is stated.
JUDGMENT
IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED that:
1. The application for judicial review is dismissed.
2. No question of general importance is stated.
Judge
FEDERAL COURT
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
DOCKET: IMM-4943-02
STYLE OF CAUSE: XIU YIN LIANG
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND
IMMIGRATION
Respondent
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
DATE OF HEARING: WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 24, 2003
REASONS FOR JDUGMENT AND
JUDGMENT BY: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE O'REILLY
DATED: FRIDAY, OCTOBER 3, 2003
APPEARANCES BY: Ms. Vania Campana
FOR THE APPLICANT
Ms. Andrea Hammell
FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Ms. Vania Campana
Lewis & Associates
290 Gerrard Street East
Toronto, Ontario
M5A 2G4 FOR THE APPLICANT
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
FOR THE RESPONDENT