IMM-3912-96
| IN THE MATTER OF the Immigration Act, 1976, as amended, S.C. 1989, c. 35; |
| AND IN THE MATTER OF a decision of the Convention Refugee Determination Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board regarding the claim to Convention Refugee Status of LEAQUAT AHMED |
B E T W E E N:
LEAQUAT AHMED
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
RICHARD, J.:
The applicant seeks to set aside a decision of the Immigration and Refugee Board (the "Board") dated October 1, 1996, wherein it determined that the applicant is not a Convention refugee.
The Board determined that "... the claimant does not have a well-founded fear of persecution. Major and relevant elements of evidence crucial to the claim are not credible since inconsistent with his affirmation that he left Bangladesh because of his political activities."
The only issue raised by the applicant is the Board's finding of non-credibility.
The Board based its finding on six conclusions which it listed and analyzed separately, one of which was not challenged by the applicant.
It is well established that the Board is a specialized tribunal that has jurisdiction to draw inferences and to gauge credibility. Accordingly, the Court will not intervene unless the Board's inferences are so unreasonable as to warrant intervention. The burden rests on the applicant to show that the inferences drawn by the Board could not reasonably have been drawn.1
The applicant has not satisfied me that five of the six conclusions drawn by the Board could not reasonably have been drawn. These conclusions were supported by the evidence and were reasonably open to it. The last conclusion drawn by the Board concerns the applicant's delay in leaving Bangladesh. While the fact of the delay is documented in the evidence, the Board appears to have made no effort at the hearing to determine the reason for the delay. However, the remaining conclusions were reasonably open to it and are central to the applicant's claim. Accordingly, the Board's determination was one that was reasonably open to it.
In these circumstances, the application for judicial review is denied.
"John D. Richard"
Judge
Toronto, Ontario
May 8, 1997
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
COURT NO: IMM-3912-96
STYLE OF CAUSE: LEAQUAT AHMED
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
DATE OF HEARING: MAY 6, 1997
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
REASONS FOR ORDER BY: RICHARD, J.
DATED: MAY 8, 1997
APPEARANCES:
Mr. Ian R. J. Wong
For the Applicant
Mr. Kevin Lunney
For the Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
White, Wong & Associates
10th Floor
6 Adelaide Street East
Toronto, Ontario
M5C 1H6
For the Applicant
George Thomson
Deputy Attorney General
of Canada
For the Respondent
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Court No.: IMM-3912-96
Between:
LEAQUAT AHMED
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
__________________
1 Aguebor v. M.E.I. (1993), 160 N.R. 315.