Date: 20010130
Docket: IMM-1065-00
BETWEEN:
MOHAMED NAWAZ MOHAMED RIFATH
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
SIMPSON J.
[1] This is an appeal from a decision of a visa officer (the "Officer") dated February 22, 2000 (the "Decision"). The Applicant applied for permanent resident status under the National Occupational Classification ("NOC") category of Computer Systems Analyst but, without interviewing the Applicant, the Officer rejected his application.
Facts
[2] The Applicant, age 22, is a citizen of Sri Lanka. He is unmarried and has no children. He was assessed as if he had a high school diploma, but he has no formal post-secondary education. The Applicant started working for Digital House (Pvt) Ltd., in Colombo, in June 1994, at age 16. He started as a "trainee hardware technician", which entailed assembling computer hardware. Because of his knowledge and ability to learn, within a few months he was promoted to the position of "systems analyst", which he held until September 1998. At that time, he was further promoted to the position of "responsible engineer" and was put in charge of the company's servicing department.
[3] The Applicant obtained a certification from Microsoft as a "systems engineer" and stated that he took only four months to complete the course, whereas most people take a full year. A strong supporting letter from Digital House said that he reached the top of the company's organizational ladder and was one of only a few systems engineers in Sri Lanka by the time he resigned in July 1999. The Applicant stated that the position of "systems engineer" was senior to the position of "systems analyst".
[4] The Applicant entered Canada in July 1999, and filed his application for permanent residence on November 3, 1999, as a Computer Systems Analyst.
The Decision
[5] In a letter dated February 22, 2000, the Officer rejected the Applicant's application for permanent residence. He made the decision based only on the written record.
[6] The Officer stated that he had "carefully assessed and investigated" the Applicant's training and experience in relation to the NOC occupation of Computer Systems Analyst/Computer Programmer. The Officer correctly noted that a bachelor's degree in computer science, business administration, commerce or mathematics, or a college diploma in computer science, is "usually required". In this regard, the parties agreed that the Officer did not err by imposing a mandatory education requirement.
[7] The Officer then stated:
| I have reviewed your education (three month certificate, dated 1998) and experience, and I do not find significant and substantial grounds that would allow you to overcome your lack of qualifications as set out in the National Occupational Classification. I have therefore determined that you do not quality for selection as a computer systems analyst. |
The Issue
[8] The issue in this case is a narrow one. Simply put, in this "dot com" age of self-taught experts, was the evidence before the Officer about the Applicant's practical training so compelling that he erred in not granting him an interview, and did the Officer err in concluding, without an interview, that, absent a post-secondary degree, this Applicant could not qualify for a visa?
Discussion
[9] On the facts of this case, it is my view that the Applicant's visa application did not include sufficient information to suggest that an interview was warranted. In particular, there was no detailed description of the computer system at his employer's place of business. All that was said was that there were many networks in one geographical location. In my view, without detailed information, there was no basis on which the Officer could conclude that the Applicant might be an unusual candidate.
[10] I have been referred to no case law dealing with how a visa officer should exercise his or her discretion about whether to refuse a visa application without an interview. However, it seems to me that when, as in this case, an applicant applies without the usual qualifications, that person bears a special onus to demonstrate that his or her experience outweighs the lack of formal training. The Applicant's references and credentials in the areas of education and experience would have to be so persuasive on paper that, on judicial review, a court could find that a decision to reject the visa application without an interview was perverse or patently unreasonable because, in the words of Reed J. of this court, there was:
| some persuasive reason for thinking that the applicant will be able to hold employment in the intended occupation despite the fact that the "usual" educational qualifications are not present.1 |
[11] In this case, the Officer was faced with a young Applicant with a high school education and several certificates obtained from internet correspondence courses, who was given the title of "systems engineer" and responsibility for a system that was not described in any meaningful detail.
Conclusion
[12] In these circumstances, I have concluded that the Officer committed no reviewable error.
(Sgd.) "Sandra J. Simpson"
Judge
Vancouver, B.C.
January 30, 2001
__________________