Digests

Hidri v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

IMM-554-00

2001 FCT 949, MacKay J.

24/8/01

12 pp.

Judicial review of CRDD's decision applicants not Convention refugees--Applicants citizens of Albania--Basing claims on political opinion, membership in particular social group--CRDD rejected claims on basis no credible, trustworthy evidence on which determination of Convention refugee status could be rendered--Holding applicants not establishing member of persecuted family because, although evidence two men with family name common to applicants' assassinated, apparently because of affiliation with Democratic Party, no credible, independent evidence linking alleged relatives with principal applicant--Applicants submitted Board required them to meet standard of proof beyond that of civil balance of probabilities, when maintained not "convinced" of applicant's allegations--Quoting from Chichmanov v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1992] F.C.J. No. 832 (F.C.A.), applicants contending by applying phraseology "we are not convinced", Board placed upon applicant too high burden of proof--Furthermore, in asserting not "convinced", evidence not examined from perspective of alleged agents of persecution, as applicants submitting proper: Re Inzuzna and Minister of Employment and Immigration (1979), 103 D.L.R. (3d) 105 (F.C.A.)--Respondent contending Board not requiring improper burden of proof by requiring applicants to "convince" it of their claims--Asserting when complete context of Chichmanov considered, correct test to be applied by CRDD whether more than minimal or mere possibility applicant would face persecution if returned to country from which fled--Application dismissed--Applicants not establishing CRDD made patently unreasonable findings of fact upon which decision based--CRDD not failing to consider totality of evidence adduced--Ignoring credible evidence error of law--But if CRDD not believing applicant credible, oral testimony may be disregarded--In instant matter, applicant's testimony found not credible generally on basis of unexplainable inconsistencies and general lack of knowledge regarding basic information on which claims based--With respect to standard of proof associated with term "convinced", recent decisions of Court asserting such terminology, in itself, not indicative of more stringent burden of proof "beyond reasonable doubt"--In each decision, civil burden of proof applied, and it was on that standard that each applicant expected to "convince" immigration officials that they ought to be permitted to enter or remain in Canada--Cannot be assumed that using word "convince" automatically connotes higher burden of proof without careful examination of contextual basis of decision--Applicants not qualifying as Convention refugees--Not satisfying Court denied procedural fairness, or that subjected to more stringent burden of proof than required.