Date: 19980619
Docket: IMM-2799-97
OTTAWA, ONTARIO, THE 19th DAY OF JUNE 1998
PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RICHARD
BETWEEN:
SAMEAH ALIZADEH AGHDAM
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
ORDER
UPON an application for judicial review of a decision of the Convention Refugee Determination Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (Refugee Division) dated June 12, 1997, wherein the Refugee Division determined that the applicant is not a Convention refugee;
THIS COURT ORDERS THAT:
The application for judicial review is dismissed.
__________________________
Judge
Date: 19980619
Docket: IMM-2799-97
BETWEEN:
SAMEAH ALIZADEH AGHDAM
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
RICHARD J.:
[1] This is an application for judicial review of a decision of the Convention Refugee Determination Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (Refugee Division) dated June 12, 1997, wherein the Refugee Division determined that the applicant is not a Convention refugee.
[2] The applicant is a thirty-seven year old female citizen of Iran who claims to fear persecution from the authorities of her country as a result of her ex-husband's political activities as an ethnic Balushi.
[3] The Refugee Division determined that the applicant is not a Convention refugee because she does not have a well-founded fear of persecution if she were to return to Iran.
In concluding that the applicant does not have a reasonable chance or a serious possibility of persecution upon her return to Iran, the Refugee Division noted the following:
(a) The applicant is divorced from her husband and has not had any contact with him since he left Iran;
(b) Shortly after her ex-husband left Iran, the applicant was arrested by the authorities, questioned and subjected to mistreatment. However, the applicant was released shortly thereafter. If the authorities were interested in imprisoning or executing the applicant, she would not have been released;
(c) The applicant's evidence that the authorities came looking for her after she was released was not credible. Her evidence in this area was internally inconsistent and very evasive;
(d) Even if the applicant's evidence in his regard were to be believed, it would appear that the last time the authorities asked about her was in June of 1995. The authorities had no interest in the applicant thereafter;
(e) Prior to her ex-husband's departure, the applicant was not under suspicion by the authorities. The applicant had no previous record of political involvement and no previous arrests. It would appear that the authorities were interested only in the applicant's ex-husband and his activities when they arrested the applicant; and,
(f) The applicant is not a Balushi.
The Refugee Division concluded, on the basis of the totality of the evidence before it, that the applicant's persecution at the hands of the authorities in Iran is a mere possibility.
The Refugee Division clearly determined that a material part of the applicant's testimony was not credible and in the course of so deciding, offered reasons for its decision citing internal inconsistencies and the applicant's demeanor. The Refugee Division found the applicant to be very evasive. This finding was not challenged by counsel for the applicant.
The Refugee Division considered the evidence of the applicant and on that evidence decided that the applicant did not have a well-founded fear of persecution. This determination was entirely within the tribunal's jurisdiction and expertise to make. It was reasonably open to the Refugee Division, on the evidence before it, to find that the incidents described by the applicant were not of a nature likely to lead to persecution on a ground enumerated in the Convention.
There must be some nexus between the personal situation of the Refugee claimant and the general human rights situation in the country from which she is fleeing. Clearly, the Refugee Division was not satisfied this onus had been met.
Accordingly, the application for judicial review is dismissed.
__________________________
Judge
Ottawa, Ontario
June 19, 1998
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF SOLICITORS AND SOLICITORS ON THE RECORD
COURT FILE NO.: IMM-2799-97
STYLE OF CAUSE: SAMEAH ALIZADEH AGHDAM v MCI
PLACE OF HEARING: Toronto, Ontario
DATE OF HEARING: June 18, 1998
REASONS FOR ORDER OF THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE RICHARD
DATED: June 19, 1998
APPEARANCES
Mr. Carey A. McKay FOR THE APPLICANT
Mr. Stephen Gold FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS ON THE RECORD:
Rosenbaum, McKay & Glady FOR THE APPLICANT Toronto, Ontario
Mr. George Thomson FOR THE RESPONDENT Deputy Attorney General of Canada