Date: 20000628
Docket: IMM-4565-99
BETWEEN:
ABBAS ALI
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION CANADA
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
(order delivered orally from the
bench on June 28, 2000)
REED, J.:
[1] I have been persuaded that there are a number of significant errors in the Board"s decision, which taken cumulatively require that it be set aside.
[2] Most significant perhaps is the statement that "The panel finds that the omission of allegedly serious injury to the neck impacts negatively on the claimant"s credibility". The applicant"s PIF refers to the beatings he allegedly received in September of 1997 and states, in part, "...I felt very weak having suffered heavy blows on my neck". He referred to the blows to his neck, in his oral evidence to the Board, and provided a doctor"s letter dated July 25, 1998, stating that the applicant had reported having received injuries to the back of his neck in September, 1997, and that he was now suffering from chronic pain and stiffness at the back of his neck.
[3] The Board makes much of the fact that the doctor"s letter does not contain a statement that the applicant"s present neck problems are consistent with the injuries he allegedly suffered in 1997. This is too fine a parsing of that letter. The doctor implicitly connected the 1997 injuries to the present difficulties; otherwise, there would have been no reason for him to have referred to them.
[4] The Board also finds the applicant"s story not to be credible because "[t]he claimant did not produce any medical record of injury to his hand". The injury was to the applicant"s arm; it was a cut that he had received prior to 1997; it was now scarred over and was not of any present medical concern to him. He was not asked about it at the hearing.
[5] Counsel for the applicant is correct in referring to the unsatisfactory analysis of the sufficiency of the evidence about the interest the police might have in the applicant. The Board referred to the fact that no charges had been laid against the applicant (the applicant had alleged arbitrary detention, physical abuse and then release). The Board then referred to Exhibits R-2, item 3, pages 14 -15, for the statement that the police"s objectives were to obtain information, which would "lead to apprehension of terrorists, and to punish those who aid and abet the commission of terrorist acts". The Board then concluded that "[t]here is insufficient evidence before the panel to indicate that the police sought the claimant".
[6] Both counsel agree that the picture that arises from a review of the documentary evidence is that the situation is closer to that of a war zone, than to that painted by the Board in the documentary excerpt that is quoted. The evidence demands a more careful analysis than that given to it by the Board.
[7] The Board impliedly found that the applicant sold his land prior to having been detained by the police in September, 1997. The Board"s decision, however, is a bit ambiguous and, more importantly, exactly when the land was sold was not addressed in the course of the hearing. There is uncertainty.
[8] Lastly, the Board refers to statements in the applicant"s "port-of-entry notes" and finds these to be inconsistent with statements he made later. The applicant gave seemingly credible explanations as to why the port-of-entry notes differed from the true story. More importantly, however, it is clear that those notes were filled in by someone whose knowledge of English was limited, and whose understanding of the questions being asked was unclear (e.g. the applicant checked the box indicating that he had never been convicted of a criminal offence, but then on the line asking "place of conviction, if different than place of offense", he wrote "New Dalhe, Inda".
[9] As I have indicated, I have reached the conclusion that cumulative effect of the errors, and incomplete analyses in the decision under review, requires that it be set aside.
"B. Reed"
JUDGE
CALGARY, Alberta
June 28, 2000
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
Date: 20000628
Docket: IMM-4565-99
BETWEEN:
ABBAS ALI
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION CANADA
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: IMM-4565-99
| STYLE OF CAUSE: ABBAS ALI v. THE MINISTER OF |
CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION CANADA
PLACE OF HEARING: CALGARY, Alberta
DATE OF HEARING: June 28, 2000
REASONS FOR FOR ORDER OF REED, J.
DATED: June 28, 2000
APPEARANCES:
Mr. Tony Clark FOR APPLICANT
Ms. Tracy King FOR RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Sherritt Greene
Calgary, Alberta FOR APPLICANT
Morris A. Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General
of Canada
Ottawa, Ontario FOR RESPONDENT