Huggins v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

Huggins v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
Court (s) Database
Federal Court Decisions
Date
2005-02-16
Neutral citation
2005 FC 250
File numbers
IMM-637-04
Decision Content
Date: 20050216
Docket: IMM-637-04
Citation:2005 FC 250
Toronto, Ontario, February 16th, 2005
Present: The Honourable Mr. Justice von Finckenstein
BETWEEN:
KELVIN HUGGINS
Applicant
and
MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
(Delivered orally from the bench and subsequently written for clarification and precision)
[1] This case involves a police officer from Trinidad who claims he fled to Canada because he was involved in a sting operation in his home country. The drug lords who were targets of said operation discovered his identity through a leak in the police force and the Applicant fled to Canada, fearing for his life. His flight was also motivated by the killing of his cousin who had been involved in another police operation against drug lords. His PRRA application had been rejected, as the PRRA officer found that the Applicant had not established an absence of state protection.
[2] I can find nothing patently unreasonable in the decision of the PRRA officer.
[3] The Applicant has the burden of establishing with clear and convincing evidence that there is no state protection in Trinidad (see Canada (Attorney General) v. Ward, [1993] 2 S.C.R. 689). The Report of the Department of State relied on by the officer indicates the contrary.
[4] A single case of a state witness being murdered (even assuming he was under police protection, which is asserted but not proven) does not amount to a lack of state protection. The Applicant has not produced any evidence establishing a lack of state protection, nor presented any convincing argument why he could not avail himself of police protection.
[5] The fact that the officer relied on publicly available documents or documents obtainable on the internet does not violate any rules of procedural fairness (see Mancia v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1998] A.C.F. No. 565 and Guzman v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2004] F.C.J. No. 1033).
[6] Accordingly, this application cannot succeed.
ORDER
THIS COURT ORDERS that this application be dismissed.
"K. von Finckenstein"
J.F.C.
FEDERAL COURT
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: IMM-637-04
STYLE OF CAUSE: KELVIN HUGGINS
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
DATE OF HEARING: FEBRUARY 16, 2005
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER BY: VON FINCKENSTEIN, J.
DATED: FEBRUARY 16, 2005
APPEARANCES BY:
Stella Iriah Anaele FOR THE APPLICANT
Greg George FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Stella Iriah Anaele
Toronto, Ontario FOR THE APPLICANT
John H. Sims, Q.C.
Deputy Attorney General of Canada FOR THE RESPONDENT