Appiah v. Canada ( Minister of Citizenship and Immigration )
IMM-3009-96
Teitelbaum J.
19/8/97
8 pp.
Application for judicial review of Immigration Refugee Board (Board) determination applicant, citizen of Ghana, not Convention refugee-Alleging persecuted in Ghana because of family's history of opposition to country's military regime-Had to report to police on monthly basis-Claimed to have been sexually assaulted at police station during mandatory visit there-Complained in vain to authorities-Board believed sexual assault but did not see link between it and claimant's family history-Board doubted applicant's credibility on number of elements because of internal inconsistencies and implausibilities-Application allowed-(1) Board committed reviewable error in assessing applicant's credibility-In spite of psychologist's testimony on matter, Board failed to properly consider impact of sexual assault (Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder) on applicant's ability to testify-Board mischaracterized medical evidence because did not highlight effects of PTSD on applicant's credibility when credibility linchpin of decision-Court puzzled by Board giving much significance to fact police seemingly belated in making inquiries about claimant's whereabouts three weeks after sexual assault-Board's reasoning contradictory and inconsistent-(2) Board failed to give any consideration to documentary record describing Ghana's political climate and human rights situation-Although Board need not refer to each piece of documentary evidence, Court must intervene where Board refers to none of documentary evidence provided by claimant or refugee hearing officer-In case of claimant alleging family history of opposition to ruling regime, particularly on basis of specific uprisings in 1981 and 1992, incumbent on Board to consider circumstances in country of origin, if only to acknowledge how they do or do not affect applicant's history-Board failed to contemplate vital questions concerning circumstances in country of origin-Thus, documentary evidence describing treatment of opponents of Rawling's state machinery escaped Board's decision-Error warranting judicial review.