Date: 20040310
OTTAWA, ONTARIO, THE 10th DAY OF MARCH 2004
PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MARTINEAU
BETWEEN:
OXANA GABISSOVA
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1] This is an application for judicial review of a decision by the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (the panel), dated April 22, 2003, that the applicant is not a "Convention Refugee" or a "person in need of protection" under sections 96 and 97 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27 (the Act).
[2] First, the applicant is challenging the quality of the translation before the panel. I cannot accept this first ground of review. On the one hand, the applicant's evidence is not convincing. In fact, this evidence is limited to the affidavit of Mr. Arsen Kerssesov, the applicant's current spouse, whose linguistic expertise has not been shown to the Court. On the other hand, the allegations contained in this affidavit do not seem determinative to me, and do not affect the validity of the decision. It is clear that the applicant benefited from the services of two accredited interpreters (after the first interpreter was replaced at the beginning of the hearing) whose skills are recognized by the panel. The translation provided at the hearing need not be perfect. However, it must be continuous, accurate, impartial, consistent and carried out by a competent individual - which, overall, appears to me to be the case. Accordingly, the Court's intervention is not warranted in this case (R. v. Tran, [1994] 2 S.C.R. 951 (S.C.C.); Dhot v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2001] F.C.J. No. 1264 (F.C.T.D.) (QL) at paragraphs 5-6; and Birgani v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1997] F.C.J. No. 590 (F.C.T.D.) (QL) at paragraphs 7-8).
[3] The second allegation made by the applicant pertains to the validity of the panel's general finding of lack of credibility. This allegation is also unfounded. Each error of fact alleged by the applicant need not be addressed here. It has been clearly established that the determination of an refugee claimant's credibility is the heartland of the Board's jurisdiction (R.K.L. v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2003] F.C.J. No. 162 (F.C.T.D.) (QL) at paragraph 7 and (2003), 228 F.T.R. 43. In other words, it is recognized that the Board has a well-established expertise to rule on questions of fact, and most particularly, to assess the credibility and subjective fear of persecution of a claimant. In this case, the applicant has not persuaded me that the general finding of lack of credibility is arbitrary or capricious, although some of the findings of fact made by the panel might seem questionable or inaccurate. On the other hand, even if I do not necessarily share the interpretation given by the panel with respect to certain aspects of the documentary evidence, the panel's decision is supported by the evidence and does not appear to be patently unreasonable. Nor is this a case where it is obvious that the sheer number of errors, whether material or not, leaves one with little confidence in the soundness of the other conclusions (Haji v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2000] F.C.J. No. 1266 (F.C.T.D.) (QL) at paragraph 14).
[4] The parties did not propose any question for certification.
ORDER
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT ORDERS that the application for judicial review be dismissed. No question of general importance will be certified.
"Luc Martineau"
Judge
Certified true translation
Kelley A. Harvey, BA, BCL, LLB
FEDERAL COURT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: IMM-3388-03
STYLE OF CAUSE: OXANA GABISSOVA v. THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
PLACE OF HEARING: MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC
DATE OF HEARING: MARCH 4, 2004
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MARTINEAU
DATE OF REASONS: MARCH 10, 2004
APPEARANCES:
ALAIN JOFFE FOR THE APPLICANT
CAROLINE CLOUTIER FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
ALAIN JOFFE FOR THE APPLICANT
MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC
MORRIS ROSENBERG FOR THE RESPONDENT
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL OF CANADA