Date: 20040426
Docket: IMM-2245-03
Citation: 2004 FC 619
Toronto, Ontario, April 26th, 2003
Present: The Honourable Madam Justice Layden-Stevenson
BETWEEN:
JAWAD MAKKI
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
[1] Mr. Jawad Makki is a 31-year-old Lebanese citizen who claims a well-founded fear of persecution because he is a supporter of the exiled former leader of Lebanon, Michel Aoun, and because he opposes the Syrian occupation of Lebanon. The Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (RPD) determined that he was not a Convention refugee nor was he a person in need of protection.
[2] Mr. Makki allegedly became politically active in 1999. In February of that year, he claims to have attended a demonstration that was broken up by Syrian forces and to have been arrested along with about fourteen others. He was taken to intelligence headquarters where he was assaulted and beaten in the back of the head with a rifle butt. He was held for three months.
[3] Upon release, Mr. Makki claims to have gone to the American Hospital in Beirut for treatment. He underwent an operation to remove a blood clot and he still bears a scar. The vision in his left eye is impaired. His employment was terminated because his security pass for the airport was revoked by the Syrian authorities.
[4] Mr. Makki's older brothers fled to Switzerland in 1985 because of Syrian harassment. They were accepted as refugees there. Mr. Makki wanted to go to Switzerland to join his brothers, but could not obtain a visa. He says that he learned about Canada as an alternative. He obtained a visa for Mexico and left Lebanon in January, 2001. He travelled here by way of Holland, Mexico and the United States. He was in Mexico for one month. He crossed illegally into the United States with the help of an agent and travelled to Detroit. He was in the United States for about three months, arrived in Canada on May 2, 2000, and claimed refugee status.
[5] The RPD identified the central issue as credibility. It determined that Mr. Makki was not truthful and not credible. Mr. Makki says that the board was wrong. He takes issue with some of the credibility findings made by the RPD. He does not discriminate between those findings that were central to the board's decision and those that were not. That is a problem.
[6] The respondent concedes that the RPD erred in determining that there was an inconsistency between the PIF and the oral evidence in relation to the pamphlet distribution, but says that this error was not material. I agree. Although I find that the board's use of the phrase "political family" was not accurate, this failing does not undermine the reasonableness of the findings in this regard. There was an inconsistency between the oral evidence when Mr. Makki testified that he did not know why his brothers left Lebanon and the PIF where he stated that they fled to Switzerland "on account of persecution for their political beliefs and out of fear that they would be killed by the Syrians". I also consider that it was open to the RPD to find it implausible that even if Mr. Makki was young when his brothers left, when he became older and allegedly became more politically active, he would not have ascertained at some time over a period of fifteen years why they had left Lebanon to seek refuge in another country.
[7] Similarly, it was open to the RPD to find that Mr Makki's testimony was vague and evasive on the membership and organization of the Aounist group of which he claims to have been a member. A reading of the transcript supports this conclusion. It was also open to the board to assign little weight to the assertions that were not included in the PIF. Mr. Makki swore that the PIF was complete. He had translation in relation to the form. He failed to include information with his respect to his involvement in activities such as spray-painting slogans and talking to youth. He additionally failed to mention being picked up from the café by Syrian police who pulled his ears and hair and threatened him. The board's error with respect to pamphlet distribution does not undermine the other inconsistencies.
[8] The decision of the RPD is not to be read microscopically, but as a whole. Findings of fact, including those of credibility, lie within the exclusive purview of the board. Only if they are patently unreasonable will they be disturbed on judicial review. Viewing the decision in context, the board's findings are not patently unreasonable. Its reasons are clear, cogent and comprehensive.
[9] The assessment of credibility is at the heart of a claim, whether it be for refugee status or as a person in need of protection. The RPD simply did not believe Mr. Makki. That finding, absent intervention by the court, disposes of his claim. The court's intervention in this case is not warranted.
[10] It is not necessary for the board to examine the documentary evidence where it has rejected the claim on the basis of credibility and has found that there is insufficient credible or trustworthy evidence to establish the claim. Had it been necessary, however, I would have found the board's approach in that respect to have been totally deficient.
[11] The application for judicial review will be dismissed. Counsel did not suggest a question for certification. This matter raises no certifiable question.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the application for judicial review is dismissed.
No question is certified.
"Carolyn Layden-Stevenson"
J.F.C.
FEDERAL COURT
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
DOCKET: IMM-2245-03
STYLE OF CAUSE: JAWAD MAKKI
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
DATE OF HEARING: APRIL 21, 2004
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER BY: LAYDEN-STEVENSON J.
APPEARANCES BY: Ms. Geraldine MacDonald
For the Applicant
Mr. Greg George
For the Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Robert Gertler and Associates
Toronto, Ontario
For the Applicant
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
For the Respondent
FEDERAL COURT
Date: 20040426
Docket: IMM-2245-03
BETWEEN:
JAWAD MAKKI
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER