IMM-2211-96
BETWEEN:
MASHOWUR RAHAMAN
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
RICHARD J.:
This is an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Division, dated June 7, 1996, in which it was decided that the applicant is not a Convention Refugee as set out in subsection 2(1) of the Immigration Act.
The applicant is a 28 year old male born in East Pakistan, and presently a citizen of Bangladesh. He entered Canada on April 6, 1995. He applied for Convention Refugee status on June 28, 1995, because of his fear of persecution on the grounds of his political opinion.
The Board's decision turned on the lack of credibility of the applicant's testimony. The Board found that the applicant's alleged involvement in the JJS is central to his alleged fear of persecution in Bangladesh, but the Board doubted the claimant's evidence concerning his involvement in the JJS. They found that there were conflicts in the testimony provided by the applicant. The applicant produced photographs, allegedly received along with a letter from his father a few days before the hearing. The Board noted that he did not produce the letter nor the envelope. The Board found that none of the information was verified, and there was no indication of the date of the photographs nor of the author of a text which had been written on the back of the photos. The Board also noted that the applicant produced no documentation concerning his involvement with the JJS.
However, the record discloses that, following the hearing, after agreeing with the Board to submit this information post-hearing, he did produce the letter from his father and documentation from the JJS which confirmed the applicant's membership and position on its executive committee. Counsel for the respondent conceded that the Board erred in not taking account of this information but claimed that there were other implausibilities in his testimony.
In this case, the respondent concedes that the Board ignored important evidence in its conclusion that the appellant was not involved in JJS. That conclusion must therefore be set aside. In my view, the Board's erroneous view of the claimant's credibility as to his involvement in JJS so coloured its approach that it failed to have adequate regard to the evidence before it as to the possibilities of persecution.1
Accordingly, the decision of the Board is set aside and remitted to a differently constituted panel.
__________________________
Judge
Ottawa, Ontario
February 12, 1997
__________________1 See Jones Muinde Kithome v. The Minister of Employment and Immigration, File No. A-149-92 (January 25, 1995).