Date: 19990121
Docket: IMM-4957-97
BETWEEN:
KAZI SARROWAR HOSSAIN
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
BLAIS J.
[1] This is an application pursuant to s. 82.1(1) of the Immigration Act R.S.C. 1995, c.I-2, for leave to commence an application for judicial review of a decision of the Convention Refugee Determination Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board dated the 24th of October 19997, wherein the Refugee Division determined that the Applicant was not a Convention refugee.
[2] In the present case, the Refugee Division Panel found that the circumstances that had caused the Applicant to flee his country, at the time of his refugee hearing, had changed for the better.
[3] Based upon the evidence, the Refugee Division Panel found that the Applicant's fear was not objectively well-founded given these changes in circumstances in Bangladesh.
[4] The Refugee Division Panel was not satisfied that there existed a reasonable chance that the claimant would be persecuted for Convention reasons if he were to return to his country of origin.
[5] Regarding the test for changes in circumstances, Mr. Justice Hugessen stated the following in Yusuf v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration):
| [2] We would add that the issue of so-called "changed-circumstances" seems to be in danger of being elevated, wrongly in our view, into a question of law when it is, at bottom, simply one of fact. A change in the political situation in a claimant's country of origin is only relevant if it may help in determining whether or not there is, at the date of the hearing, a reasonable and objectively foreseeable possibility that the claimant will be persecuted in the event of return there. That is an issue for factual determination and there is no separate legal "test" by which any alleged change in circumstances must be measured. The use of words such as "meaningful", "effective" or "durable" is only helpful if one keeps clearly in mind that the only question, and therefore the only test, is that derived from the definition of Convention Refugee in s. 2 of the Act: does the claimant now have a well-founded fear of persecution? Since there was in this case evidence to support the Board's negative finding on this issue, we would not intervene.1 |
[6] In the decision Mileva v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration). Pratte J. said:
| The fact that the political situation existing in a claimant's country of origin has developed in such a way as to removed the reason causing him to fear persecution is obviously a fact relevant to the question of whether that person can validly maintain that he is a Convention refugee.2 |
[7] In my opinion, the applicant did not succeed to convince me that the Board has committed any reviewable error.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
| The application for judicial review is dismissed. |
There is no serious question of general importance to be certified.
"Pierre Blais"
Judge
Toronto, Ontario
January 21, 1999
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
COURT NO: IMM-4957-97
| STYLE OF CAUSE: KAZI SARROWAR HOSSAIN |
- and -
| THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION |
DATE OF HEARING: WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 20, 1999
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
| REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER BY: BLAIS J. |
DATED: THURSDAY, JANUARY 21, 1999
APPEARANCES: Mr. Steven Solway
For the Applicant
Mr. Toby Hoffman
For the Respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Steven Solway
| Barrister and Solicitor |
| 9 Menin Drive |
| Toronto, Ontario |
| M6C 3J1 |
| For the Applicant |
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General
of Canada
For the Respondent
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Date: 19990121
Docket: IMM-4957-97
Between:
| KAZI SARROWAR HOSSAIN |
Applicant
- and -
| THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION |
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
| AND ORDER |
__________________