Docket: IMM-267-04
EDMONTON, ALBERTA, AUGUST 11TH , 2004.
Present: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KONRAD VON FINCKENSTEIN
BETWEEN:
MUNZER JABBOUR
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
(Delivered from the Bench and subsequently written for clarification and precision)
[1] The Applicant is a 27 year-old citizen of Syria who first came to Canada in July 2002 on a visitor's visa. In February 2003, he claimed refugee status on the basis that he faced persecution in Syria due to his religious beliefs and his opposition to the government. He also claimed that he had become a "refugee sur place". Conditions in Syria meant that he would face persecution there as a result of having made an asylum claim in Canada.
[2] The Board found that the claimant lacked credibility and rejected his claim. The Board also found that "the documentary evidence reveals that there is no evidence that the government of Syria persecuted on their return to Syria those who applied for, but were denied asylum abroad" ( Tribunal record p. 13).
[3] This was not completely accurate. The Tribunal Record actually shows that returnees may be prosecuted (DOS report for 2002 found at Tribunal Record p. 203). A report from an organization called 'Freedom House' found at page 161 of the Tribunal Record , indicates on
p.163 that four returnees were arrested. There is no further detail as to who they were and why they were arrested.
[4] The key issue here, as to whether the Applicant would be arrested, depends on his circumstances. Since he was found not to be credible, it is impossible for the Board to establish what fate would befall him should he return to Syria.
[5] The credibility of the Applicant is vital to the determination of a refugee sur place claim. See Barry v. M.C.I. [2002] F.C.J. No. 266; Ghribi v. M.C.I. [2003] F.C.J. No. 1502.
[6] While the Board overstated the case when it used the expression "that there is no evidence that the government of Syria persecuted on their return to Syria those who applied for, but were denied asylum abroad", this statement, taken in light of the rest of the Tribunal record and the Applicant's lack of credibility, does not amount to a material error.
[7] Both parties agreed at the outset that the applicable standard of review is patent unreasonableness. On the basis of the Applicant's lack of credibility and the paucity of the documentary evidence, it was not unreasonable for the panel to conclude that the Applicant had not made out a 'refugee sur place' claim.
[8] Accordingly this application cannot succeed.
ORDER
THIS COURT ORDERS that this application be dismissed.
"Konrad von Finckenstein"
Judge
FEDERAL COURT
NAME OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
STYLE OF CAUSE: MUNZER JABBOUR v. THE MINISTER OF
CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
PLACE OF HEARING: EDMONTON, AB
DATE OF HEARING: AUGUST 11, 2004
REASONS FOR ORDER: VON FINCKENSTEIN J.
APPEARANCES:
Karen Swartzenberger FOR APPLICANT
Robert Drummond FOR RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
McCuaig Desrochers LLP
Morris Rosenberg, Deputy Attorney General of Canada