Date: 19980313
Docket: IMM-1626-97
BETWEEN:
HANINA KHALOF AND SOZAN AKEL
Applicant(s)
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent(s)
REASONS FOR ORDER
REED, J.
[1] I have come to the conclusion that the decision under review must be set aside. I want to make it clear that if the decision had been mine, I might not have come to a result different from that reached by the Convention Refuge Determination Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (the "Board"). However, the reasons given for the decision contain so many problematic assertions, that a reviewing Court is forced to conclude that it was made without regard to the material before it.
[2] The Board stated that the Christian Phalange militia was also known as the Lebanese Forces. While the former was part of the latter, they were not equivalent. The Board stated that there was no serious possibility of persecution because the applicants' fear resulted from the fact that their family had supported the militia, which was now disbanded. The applicants evidence was that it was the family's support of the Phalange Party, not the militia, that caused the family trouble.
[3] Also, the Board seemed to be under the impression that the applicants had been travelling under an illegal passport when they returned to Syria in 1993:
| In any event, the key occurrence in this connection is the claimants' return from Canada in 1993. On this occasion, they were unaccompanied by any influential person. The adult claimant was questioned; but, significantly, her passport was not seized. Had that passport been illegally obtained through bribery, one would expect that it would have been seized on that occasion. It was not. The claimants subsequently used it to leave the country in 1995. We do not believe the adult claimant's story that the passport and exit permit for herself and the other family members were all obtained illegally. |
[4] The applicant did not testify that her passport was illegal. Her evidence was that it was obtained expeditiously by the payment of money. She was travelling on her own valid passport. There is no reason to think those interrogating her at the airport would have any way of knowing that she had paid a bribe to have the issuance of the passport expedited.
[5] The Board on several occasions in its reasons indicates that because there had been no actual persecution, there was no serious possibility of persecution. This is contrary to established jurisprudence. The existence of actual persecution is not necessary to establish a serious possibility of future persecution.
[6] The Board referred to various trips into and out of Syria by members of the applicants' family, and stated that this indicated that those members were unlikely to have been the subject of persecution. The trips, by and large, were between Arab countries and there was evidence with respect to some of them that crossing the borders between those countries was relatively easy.
[7] The cumulative effect of these defects in the Board's decision leads me to conclude that the decision must be set aside and referred back for rehearing.
"B. Reed"
Judge
Toronto, Ontario
March 13, 1998
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
DOCKET: IMM-1626-97
| STYLE OF CAUSE: HANINA KHALOF AND |
SOZAN AKEL
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
DATE OF HEARING: MARCH 12, 1998
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
REASONS FOR ORDER BY: REED, J.
DATED: MARCH 13, 1998
APPEARANCES:
Ms. Linda Martschenko
For the Applicant(s)
Mr. David Tyndale
For the Respondent(s)
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Law Firm
359 Goyeau Street
Windsor, Ontario
N9A 1G9
For the Applicant(s)
George Thomson
Deputy Attorney General
of Canada
For the Respondent(s)
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Date: 19980313
Docket: IMM-1626-97
BETWEEN:
HANINA KHALOF AND
SOZAN AKEL
Applicant(s)
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent(s)
REASONS FOR ORDER