Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

Date: 20050314

Docket: IMM-7515-04

Citation: 2005 FC 359

Ottawa, Ontario, this 14th day of March, 2005

Present:           THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE von FINCKENSTEIN

BETWEEN:

                                                          VIOREL MUNTEANU

                                                                                                                                            Applicant

                                                                         - and -

                                               THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

                                                          AND IMMIGRATION

                                                                                                                                        Respondent

                                            REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER

(Delivered orally from the bench and subsequently written

for clarification and precision)


[1]                The Applicant, Viorel Munteanu, is a Romanian citizen who left Romania in 1991 and went to Germany, where he lived until 1996. Upon returning to Romania, the Applicant was questioned, held for a day and beaten. The Applicant claims that in August 1996, he was stabbed in the back several times by Hazam Balta, the son of a governor, because he asked Mr. Balta's girlfriend, Julia-Laura Popoutanu, to dance at a bar. When he tried to file a complaint against Mr. Balta at the police station, the police beat and insulted him. After the relationship between Mr. Balta and Ms. Popoutanu ended, the Applicant married her on June 9, 1997.

[2]                He claims that at this point, he was still afraid of Mr. Balta and consequently, he often had to hide. Nonetheless he obtained Turkish visas of varying lengths and made several trips there between June 1997 and December 2000. He went to Italy in September 2002. Unable to find work there, he went to Spain, where he lived for four months before coming to Canada on December 18, 2002.

[3]                The Applicant claims that he is afraid to return to Romania:

a)        because of Mr. Balta and the police, who the Applicant claims are Mr. Balta's accessories and

b)        because in December 2000, his photograph was published in an article on stowaways in a Romanian newspaper and he fears this publication would allow the authorities to identify him if he were to return to Romania.

[4]                The Board denied his claim finding his allegation of persecution not credible and finding that there were no objective reasons for his fear of persecution.


[5]                It is well established that the Board has a significant degree of expertise in the determination of questions of fact. The evaluation of an applicant's credibility is squarely within the jurisdiction of the Board. (See Rahaman v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2000] F.C.J. No. 1800 (QL) (T.D.))

[6]                The Board found:

(a)        there were significant differences between the Port of Entry ("POE") Notes and the Applicant's Personal Information Form ("PIF");

(b)       the persecution the Applicant refers to took place four years ago. While he was allegedly being persecuted from January 2001 to October 2001, he was living and working in Romania; and

(c)        that the Applicant was able to travel to Turkey and back on multiple visas without any difficulties.

[7]                In light of the foregoing, the Board's decision cannot be considered patently unreasonable and should not be disturbed.

Documentary Evidence

[8]         The Board referred to the Applicant's subjective fear at page 5 of its Decision stating: "(a)dmittedly the situation in Romania is not ideal. However, the government wants to improve the situation by putting forward various legal measures." In most cases, it would be insufficient for the Board to dismiss a claim of objective fear in such a curt manner. However, in the present case, as the Board did not find the Applicant had established a subjective fear, it was unnecessary for the Board to undertake an analysis of objective fear.


[9]                Accordingly, applying the standard of review of patent unreasonableness (see Umba v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2004] F.C.J. No. 17), this application cannot succeed.

                                                                       ORDER

THIS COURT ORDERS that this application be dismissed.

"K. von Finckenstein"

                                                                                                                                                   Judge                 


                                                             FEDERAL COURT

                            NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                                                               IMM-7515-04

STYLE OF CAUSE:                                                               VIOREL MUNTEANU

AND

THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

AND IMMIGRATION

PLACE OF HEARING:                                                         HALIFAX, NOVA SCOTIA

DATE OF HEARING:                                                           MARCH 9, 2005

REASONS FOR ORDER

AND ORDER :                                                                      von FINCKENSTEIN J.

DATED:                                                                                   MARCH 14, 2005

APPEARANCES:

Eugene Tan                                                                               FOR APPLICANT

Susan Inglis                                                                               FOR RESPONDENT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:

Cooper and MacDonald                                                            FOR APPLICANT

Halifax, Nova Scotia

John H. Sims, Q.C.                                                                   FOR RESPONDENT

Deputy Attorney General of Canada


 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.