Date: 20030627
Docket: IMM-3428-02
Citation: 2003 FCT 802
Ottawa, Ontario, this 27th day of June 2003
Present: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE O'REILLY
BETWEEN:
AKOSUA AFRIYIE
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT AND JUDGMENT
[1] Ms. Afriyie arrived in Canada from Ghana in the spring of 2000. She claims that she had been the subject of an arranged marriage that was to have taken place the previous autumn. However, her betrothed, Kwesi Addai, died before the marriage took place. She was then promised to Kwame Addai, Kwesi's younger brother. She says she was abused by both men and was unhappy with all of these arrangements. She fled Accra to her uncle's home in Akosombo in order to avoid them. Her uncle sheltered her for a time, then assisted her in leaving Ghana for Canada.
[2] Ms. Afriyie claimed refugee status in Canada on the grounds that she was persecuted for her membership in a particular social group defined by her gender and her status as a subject of an arranged marriage. Her claim was heard and rejected by a panel of the Immigration and Refugee Board. The Board found that her version of events was inconsistent in certain respects, and that she had reasonable alternatives to seeking refuge in Canada. She could have found a safe place to live elsewhere in Ghana, and could have tried to secure the protection of state authorities in her home state.
[3] Ms. Afriyie submits that the Board made serious errors in its handling of the evidence supporting her claim and requests, by way of this application for judicial review, that her claim be reconsidered by a different panel of the Board.
I. Issues
[4] There are two kinds of errors alleged by Ms. Afriyie. First, she suggests that the Board failed to consider adequately the documentary evidence before it with respect to the practice of arranged marriages in Ghana. Second, she says that the Board's conclusion that her version of events lacked credibility was ill-founded.
A. Did the Board take adequate account of the evidence regarding arranged marriages?
[5] The Board considered evidence relating to the practice of arranged marriages in Ghana and set out its findings in its reasons. The Board's findings may be summarized as follows:
. these marriages are rare in urban areas, such as Accra;
. they are most common among illiterates, the poor and those who follow a traditional lifestyle;
. women can avoid these marriages by leaving the family and moving elsewhere;
. forced marriages are currently rare.
[6] The Board then referred to the attributes of Ms. Afriyie. She is a sophisticated and well-educated woman from a major urban centre. It relied on her profile, in part, in concluding that she was not the subject of a forced, arranged marriage.
[7] Ms. Afriyie submits, quite properly, that the Board's findings do not rule out entirely the possibility that she was forced into an arranged marriage. The Board's findings that such marriages are rare, and that Ms. Afriyie was an unlikely candidate, would not, in themselves, justify a conclusion that Ms. Afriyie's version of events was incapable of belief. However, the Board did not base its decision solely on these findings. It found that Ms. Afriyie's testimony was unconvincing because of various contradictions in it. The fact that the overall scenario seemed improbable was an additional factor that the Board was entitled to consider in evaluating the merits of Ms. Afriyie's claim as a whole. The more important issue from her perspective was the Board's assessment of her credibility, to be discussed below.
[8] Counsel for Ms. Afriyie pointed me to documentary evidence in the tribunal record that indicated that women who refuse to acquiesce in the marriage arrangements made for them are sometimes subjected to isolation, scorn and, in rare cases, violence. They usually seek refuge in urban centres because state protection is unavailable in rural areas. The Board did not refer expressly to this evidence in its reasons. However, I do not see this as a flaw in the Board's treatment of the issue. Nothing in its reasons contradicts this evidence. Nor are its conclusions weakened by it. In fact, the Board concluded that Ms. Afriyie could have found refuge in another urban centre, Kumasi, rather than in Canada. That conclusion was consistent with the documentary evidence referred to by counsel for Ms. Afriyie. The Board was not required to refer to all of the documentary evidence before it.
B. Was the Board's credibility finding supported by the evidence?
[9] There were three areas of Ms. Afriyie's testimony that caused the Board concern.
[10] First, she said she was never actually married, but her uncle's affidavit stated that she was indeed married to Kwesi Addai and then to Kwame Addai. The Board drew a negative inference from the contradiction. It also discounted the evidence in the affidavit.
[11] Second, Ms. Afriyie stated in her Personal Information Form that she worked in Accra until March 2000. Yet, she testified that she went into hiding at her uncle's house (a three-hour drive from Accra) in January 2000. She said that she was confused between the third month of 2000 and the third day of January of that year. The Board concluded that Ms. Afriyie's account was a fabrication.
[12] Third, at the port of entry to Canada, she gave her address as being that of her parents or her sister (it was not clear which). When asked why she did not provide her uncle's address, she said that she did not know her uncle's address. Yet, she had supposedly gone to her uncle's home from Accra and lived there for two months. The Board did not find her explanation satisfactory.
[13] In conclusion, the Board found that Ms. Afriyie had not gone into hiding at all.
[14] Having reviewed the testimony of Ms. Afiyie, I cannot find any serious error on the Board's part in arriving at a negative assessment of her credibility. The Board was entitled to draw adverse inferences from the contradictions in her testimony. These were not trivial matters. They went to the core of her claim about the forced marriage and her subsequent flight to her uncle's residence.
[15] Accordingly, I must dismiss this application for judicial review. No question of general importance was proposed for certification and none is stated.
JUDGMENT
IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED that:
1. The application for judicial review is dismissed.
2. No question of general importance is stated.
"James W. O'Reilly"
J.F.C.C.
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: IMM-3428-02
STYLE OF CAUSE: AKOSUA AFRIYIE
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO
DATE OF HEARING: JUNE 10, 2003
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
AND JUDGMENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE O'REILLY
APPEARANCES BY:
MR.MUNYONZWE HAMALENGWA FOR THE APPLICANT
MR.GREG G.GEORGE FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
MR.MUNYONZWE HAMALENGWA
BARRISTER & SOLICITOR
45 SHEPPARD AVENUE EAST, SUITE 900
TORONTO, ONTARIO FOR THE APPLICANT
M2N 5W9
Tel.: (416) 222-8111
Fax: (416) 222-7518
MORRIS ROSENBERG
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA FOR THE RESPONDENT
TORONTO, ONTARIO