Khan v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
Court headnote
Khan v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2004-12-23 Neutral citation 2004 FC 1773 File numbers IMM-9276-03 Decision Content Date: 20041223 Docket: IMM-9276-03 Citation: 2004 FC 1773 BETWEEN: KHAN Shamshair Applicant - and - THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER PINARD J.: [1] This is an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (the "Board") dated November 12, 2003, wherein the Board found the applicant not to be a Convention refugee or a "person in need of protection" as defined in sections 96 and 97 respectively of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27. [2] The applicant is a citizen of Pakistan and is a Shia Muslim. He alleges a well-founded fear of persecution based on his religious beliefs. [3] The Board denied the applicant's claim for refugee status because it found that an Internal Flight Alternative exists and the applicant would be able to seek state protection. [4] I consider this a case where the applicant has rebutted the presumption that the Board considered all of the evidence before it. Indeed, having expressly found the applicant to be credible, the Board did not even mention one single piece of the documentary evidence submitted by the latter, namely exhibits P1, P3 and P7, which are reports and documents much less positive, concerning country conditions in Pakist…
Read full judgment
Khan v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Court (s) Database Federal Court Decisions Date 2004-12-23 Neutral citation 2004 FC 1773 File numbers IMM-9276-03 Decision Content Date: 20041223 Docket: IMM-9276-03 Citation: 2004 FC 1773 BETWEEN: KHAN Shamshair Applicant - and - THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION Respondent REASONS FOR ORDER PINARD J.: [1] This is an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (the "Board") dated November 12, 2003, wherein the Board found the applicant not to be a Convention refugee or a "person in need of protection" as defined in sections 96 and 97 respectively of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27. [2] The applicant is a citizen of Pakistan and is a Shia Muslim. He alleges a well-founded fear of persecution based on his religious beliefs. [3] The Board denied the applicant's claim for refugee status because it found that an Internal Flight Alternative exists and the applicant would be able to seek state protection. [4] I consider this a case where the applicant has rebutted the presumption that the Board considered all of the evidence before it. Indeed, having expressly found the applicant to be credible, the Board did not even mention one single piece of the documentary evidence submitted by the latter, namely exhibits P1, P3 and P7, which are reports and documents much less positive, concerning country conditions in Pakistan, than the sole UK Country Assessment for Pakistan, April 2003, relied upon by the Board. [5] Upon reviewing all the documentary evidence, I find that the Board omitted to examine the most recent documentation of country conditions in Pakistan and that it failed to consider a 33-page report by Amnesty International which includes an in-depth investigation conducted by this organization. The aforementioned documents submitted by the applicant generally paint a less positive picture of the state protection for the Shia minority in Pakistan than the Board has presented in its analysis. [6] Given these special circumstances, I am of the view that the Board ought to have specifically referred to the documentary evidence submitted by a credible applicant and given explicit reasons for preferring the limited documentary evidence (exhibit A-4) it relied upon (see, for example, Okyere-Akosah v. Canada (M.E.I.) (1992), 157 N.R. 387 (F.C.A.) and Canada (M.C.I.) v. Sahin (1994), 87 F.T.R. 19). [7] Consequently, the application for judicial review is granted and the matter is sent back for reconsideration by a differently constituted panel of the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board. JUDGE OTTAWA, ONTARIO December 23, 2004 FEDERAL COURT SOLICITORS OF RECORD DOCKET: IMM-9276-03 STYLE OF CAUSE: KHAN Shamshair v. THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec DATE OF HEARING: November 24, 2004 REASONS FOR ORDER BY: PINARD J. DATED: December 23, 2004 APPEARANCES: Me Styliani Markaki FOR THE APPLICANT Me Sherry Rafai Far FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Styliani Markaki FOR THE APPLICANT Montréal, Quebec Morris Rosenberg FOR THE RESPONDENT Deputy Attorney General of Canada Montréal, Quebec
Source: decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca