Date: 19980305
Docket: IMM-1672-97
MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC, THE 5th DAY OF MARCH 1998
PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NADON
BETWEEN: ALEXANDER MARCHUKOV
LYUBOV MARCHUKOVA
Applicants
AND:
MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
Application under section 82.1 of the Immigration Act for judicial review of a decision dated March 26, 1997 in file numbers M95-03156 and M95-03157 by Jacques LaSalle and Ghislain Lavoie, members of the Immigration and Refugee Board.
O R D E R
The application for judicial review is dismissed.
Marc Nadon
Judge
Certified true translation
Peter Douglas
Date: 19980305
Docket: IMM-1672-97
Between:
ALEXANDER MARCHUKOV
LYUBOV MARCHUKOVA
Applicants
AND:
MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
NADON J.
[1] The applicants ask this Court to set aside a decision of the Refugee Division dated March 26, 1997, which dismissed their refugee claims.
[2] The applicants, a father and daughter, are citizens of Kazakhstan. They allege that they have a well-founded fear of persecution on the basis of their Russian nationality and their membership in a particular social group.
[3] The Refugee Division dismissed the claims on two grounds. First, it found that the principal applicant"s story was not credible. Second, it found that there was an internal flight alternative, in northern Kazakhstan where citizens of Russian nationality make up about 70% of the population.
[4] In Rasaratnam v. Canada (M.E.I.), [1992] 1 F.C. 706, the Federal Court of Appeal stated that the onus is on a refugee claimant to show, on a balance of probabilities, that there is a possibility of persecution throughout the country, including the part of the country where an internal flight alternative is available.
[5] Mr. Justice Dubé of this Court recently repeated the Court of Appeal"s remarks on the onus. In Anisimov v. M.C.I. (docket IMM-4693-96, unreported, October 27, 1997), my colleague wrote the following:
| As to the internal flight alternative, the onus of proof rests on the applicants to show, on a balance of probabilities, that there is a serious possibility of persecution throughout the country, including the areas specified by the documentation as being safe havens affording internal flight alternatives. The applicants have not satisfied the Board that such a serious possibility exists. |
[6] In view of the evidence in the record, the Refugee Division"s finding that an internal flight alternative was available in Kazakhstan is not at all unreasonable. I therefore cannot find that the Refugee Division made an error.
[7] Given my decision on the internal flight issue, there is no need to consider the other ground submitted by the Refugee Division in support of my decision to dismiss the claims, namely the principal applicant"s credibility.
[8] For these reasons, the application for judicial review will be dismissed.
Marc Nadon
Judge
MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC
March 5, 1998
Certified true translation
Peter Douglas
FEDERAL COURT " TRIAL DIVISION
Date: 19980305
Docket: IMM-1672-97
Between:
ALEXANDER MARCHUKOV
LYUBOV MARCHUKOVA
Applicants
AND
MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
FEDERAL COURT " TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
COURT FILE NO.: IMM-1672-97
| STYLE OF CAUSE: ALEXANDER MARCHUKOV LYUBOV MARCHUKOVA |
Applicants
AND
MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec
DATE OF HEARING: March 5, 1998
REASONS FOR ORDER BY: Nadon J.
Dated: March 5, 1998
APPEARANCES:
Michelle Langelier for the applicants
Daniel Latulippe for the respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Michelle Langelier for the applicants
Montréal, Quebec
George Thomson for the respondent
Deputy Attorney General
of Canada
Ottawa, Ontario