CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION |
Status in Canada |
Humanitarian and Compassionate Considerations |
Ojinma v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
IMM-4662-01
2002 FCT 922, MacKay J.
30/8/02
9 pp.
Judicial review of immigration officer's dismissal of applicant's application for landing on humanitarian and compassionate (H&C) grounds--Applicant, citizen of Nigeria, applied for Convention refugee status, but claim refused-- Filed H&C application--Applicant scheduled to be removed from Canada September 5, 2000, but failed to appear for removal--Warrant issued for arrest--Applicant arrested December 12, detained until December 19, when authorities tried to deport him, by plane, to Nigeria--Twice, applicant resisted to such extent airline would not allow him on board--Post-Claim Determination Officer (PCDO) informed applicant's counsel applicant would be at risk if returned to Nigeria, but copy of risk opinion not provided to applicant-- Nevertheless, immigration officer refused applicant's H&C application--Application dismissed-- Standard of reasonableness applied: Tartchinska v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) (2000), 185 F.T.R. 161 (F.C.T.D.)--Immigration officer not improperly fettering discretion--Mere fact immigration officer made reference to elements of CRDD's, PCDO's decisions not indication officer not independently considering evidence before her--No evidence to support allegation immigration officer biased against applicant--In essence, applicant's argument immigration officer improperly weighed evidence--Not function of Court on judicial review to assess weighing of evidence--Court not persuaded officer's decision unreasonable--Immigration officer not erring by failing to disclose PCDO's risk assessment to applicant--In circumstances, immigration officer not erring by failing to provide applicant with copy of PCDO's risk opinion-- Applicant informed of risk opinion's existence, result-- Applicant had ample opportunity to present evidence relevant to case, and to have evidence fully and fairly considered-- PCDO did not rely on any material not known to applicant in considering H&C application--No unfairness in process of H&C decision.