Date: 19991117
Docket: IMM-6769-98
BETWEEN:
MOHINDER SINGH ATWAL,
Applicant,
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION,
Respondent.
REASONS FOR ORDER
NADON, J.
[1] The Applicant seeks to set aside a decision of the Refugee Board dated December 8, 1998 which dismissed his claim to refugee status in Canada.
[2] The Applicant is a citizen of India. He left his country in April 1997 and arrived in Canada on April 22, 1997. He claimed refugee status on May 9, 1997.
[3] Donald Galloway, the presiding and sole member of the Refugee Board panel who heard the Applicant"s claim, concluded that the Applicant was not a convention refugee. Mr. Galloway was of the view that there was not a well-founded basis for the Applicant"s fear of persecution, that the Applicant had a reasonable flight alternative in India, specifically in New Delhi and that there was no nexus between the Applicant"s claim and a Convention ground.
[4] With respect to the lack of nexus, Mr. Galloway says at page 4 of his reasons:
| In the alternative, even assuming I had determined that the claimant faced a serious possibility of persecution, the claimant testified that the persecution was from individuals who sought vengeance and were trying to frame him. He testified that the police would do whatever they were told to do by these influential politicians. Counsel argued that the persecution was based on perceived political opinion: that the police would attribute political opinions - those of terrorists in Punjab - to the claimant. But as counsel admitted, an attempt to determine the perception of the police in this case must be based on pure speculation. The claimant testified that the police would do whatever they were told, in effect saying that they would follow orders without making inquiries into their rationale. Further, if Lal and Ram were trying to frame him and were pursuing a personal vendetta, it could not be concluded that they were attributing a political opinion to him. Moreover, there is no social group to which the claimant belongs which could be defined independently of any persecution suffered which would allow him to fall within the terms of the definition of "Convention refugee". |
[5] At page 40 of the transcript of the November 16, 1998 hearing of the Applicant"s refugee claim, counsel for the Applicant conceded, rightly in my view, that the Applicant"s neighbours Swarna Ram and his son Mohan Lal were attempting to frame him. Thus, the alleged persecution by his neighbours and the police was not the result of the Applicant"s political or imputed political opinions.
[6] In my view, Mr. Galloway conclusion regarding nexus is, on the evidence before him, unassailable.
[7] In view of my conclusion on this point I need not discuss the other issues raised by the Applicant. Consequently, this judicial review application will be dismissed.
(Sgd.) "M. Nadon"
Judge
November 17, 1999
Vancouver, British Columbia
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
IMMIGRATION DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS ON THE RECORD
COURT FILE NO.: IMM-6769-98
STYLE OF CAUSE: Mohinder Singh Atwal
v.
MCI
PLACE OF HEARING: Vancouver, British Columbia
DATE OF HEARING: November 17, 1999
REASONS FOR ORDER OF Nadon, J.
DATED: November 17, 1999
APPEARANCES:
Mr. Mishal Abrahams For the Applicant
Mr. Victor Caux For the Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Kang & Company
Delta, BC For the Applicant
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney
General of Canada For the Respondent