Digests

Decision Information

Decision Content

Zaribaf v. Canada ( Minister of Citizenship and Immigration )

IMM-1492-94

Gibson J.

18/10/94

8 pp.

Application for judicial review of CRDD decision applicant not Convention refugee -- Applicant citizen of Iran -- Alleging well-founded fear of persecution based on political opinion, membership in particular social group -- Applicant detained, beaten after criticizing regime in Iran -- Participated in distribution of anti-establishment flyers -- Shop raided, partner arrested, claimant going into hiding -- Leaving Iran using valid passport bearing false exit stamp -- Fearing photographs taken while participating in hunger strike in Canada falling into hands of Iranian authorities -- Based on absence of evidence Iranian authorities pursuing search for applicant after raiding shop, and on fact applicant able to leave Iran using valid passport in own name through Teheran airport where evidence showing departure closely scrutinized, CRDD concluding at time of departure not wanted by Iranian authorities -- Further concluding applicant not providing credible explanation for failing to retain or recover valid passport upon or since leaving Malaysia -- Applicant alleging Board biased -- Citing report by James C. Hathaway, "Rebuilding Trust", stating Board may appear biased because forced into adversarial position -- Application dismissed -- While Hathaway report, resulting media coverage might cause refugee claimants concern, test for bias requiring reasonable, right-minded person, or informed person, to obtain required information, view matter realistically and practically, and think matter through -- Requiring reasonable, right-minded person or informed person to review transcript of hearing before CRDD, to review documentary evidence before it and then to review reasons for decision -- Court taking these steps, concluding reasonable, right-minded person, or informed person, not finding it more likely than not CRDD members would not decide fairly in reaching decision they did herein.

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.