Date: 20021113
Docket: IMM-4768-01
Neutral citation: 2002 FCT 1159
BETWEEN:
HANIF IBRAHIM PATEL
REHANA HANIF PATEL
SUMAIYA HANIF PATEL
YUNUS HANIF PATEL
FATMA HANIF PATEL
Applicants
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
LUTFY A.C.J.
[1] Hanif Ibrahim Patel and the other applicants, who are his spouse and their children, are citizens of India. Born in Rwanda to parents of Indian origin, Mr. Patel was raised and remained in Rwanda for most of his life. In 1991, the Patels were married in Rwanda where two of their three children were born.
[2] In 1994, the Patel family fled Rwanda to escape the atrocities of that country's civil war. After a short stay in Burundi, where the third child was born, the applicants moved to India to settle permanently. According to Mr. Patel's evidence, after some three months of being subjected to persecutory acts by Hindu fundamentalists for being Muslim new arrivals, the family returned to Rwanda.
[3] The Convention Refugee Determination Division concluded that Mr. Patel's evidence was not credible and determined that the applicants were not Convention refugees. In this application for judicial review, counsel for the applicants focussed his argument principally on two of the panel's findings of fact.
[4] First, the panel noted the discrepancy in the amount of money allegedly paid to extortionists by Mr. Patel. In his oral testimony, he mentioned an amount double than that indicated in his personal information form. I have reviewed the transcript and am satisfied that the panel's finding was not only reasonable but is further supported by another inconsistency on the same issue in the applicant's affidavit filed with this application for judicial review.
[5] Similarly, it was open to the panel to support its negative finding of credibility on the basis of Mr. Patel's failure to disclose in his personal information form that he reported threats he had received to police authorities. Mr. Patel's omission takes on even greater significance upon review of his extensive oral testimony that the police arrested two persons as a result of his complaint.
[6] In summary, the applicants have fallen far short of establishing that the decision under review is patently unreasonable. During the hearing, counsel for the applicants abandoned his argument, properly in my view, concerning the panel's finding under subsection 69.1(9.1) of the Immigration Act.
[7] Accordingly, this application for judicial review will be dismissed. I agree with both parties that there exists no serious question for certification.
"Allan Lutfy"
A.C.J.
Ottawa, Ontario
November 13, 2002.
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: IMM-4768-01
STYLE OF CAUSE: HANIF IBRAHIM PATEL, REHANA HANIF PATEL,
SUMAIYA HANIF PATEL,YUNUS HANIF PATEL AND FATMA HANIF PATEL
Applicants
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO
DATE OF HEARING: NOVEMBER 5, 2002
REASONS FOR ORDER : THE ASSOCIATE CHIEF JUSTICE
DATED: NOVEMBER 13, 2002
APPEARANCES: John M. Guoba
For plaintiff / applicant
Tamrat Gebeyehu
For defendant/ respondent
SOLICITORS OF RECORD: John M. Guoba
2425 Eglinton Avenue East, Ste 211 Toronto, Ontario
M1K 5G8
For applicants/respondents
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Department of Justice
First Canadian Place, Box 36
Toronto, Ontario
M5X 1N6
For defendant/ respondent