Date: 20040329
Docket: IMM-5850-03
Citation: 2004 FC 478
BETWEEN:
MANPREET KAUR GANGHUS
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
[1] Ms. Ganghus is a young Sikh woman from the Punjab area in India. She was raped by the police there. She has asked to be accorded the status of a refugee or a person otherwise in need of protection within the meaning of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27. Her claim was rejected by the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board on the grounds that she did not need international protection. There was an internal flight alternative available to her. It was found that there was no substantial ground to believe that Ms. Ganghus would be subject to police persecution in any part of India other than in the Punjab, and that it would be reasonable for her to seek refuge in another part of India. This is a judicial review of that decision.
[2] It was strongly urged upon me by counsel for Ms. Ganghus that an internal flight alternative was neither possible nor reasonable in the circumstances. It was submitted that although the panel stated that the gender guidelines of the chairperson of the Board were taken into account, they could not have been considered in any meaningful way as the claim should have been assessed in detail against those guidelines.
[3] The panel found, and it was reasonable to find, that the matter began as a land dispute with neighbours of the Ganghus' family who were well connected with a rogue policeman. This led to trumpted up charges of political activism on the part of Ms. Ganghus's brother and to her rape.
[4] Thereafter, she went to another area in the Punjab with her parents for a few days. Then they all moved to New Delhi where they stayed for five months. Apparently, they spent that five months in hiding because of fear that as strangers they might be reported, and fear that the police of the Punjab might be looking for them.
[5] The Court can only imagine Ms. Ganghus' trauma; indeed, this Court is probably incapable of fully appreciating that trauma. One can appreciate that Ms. Ganghus might well want to leave India forever, to get a fresh start in another country. However, it must also be kept in mind that the panel was dealing with a refugee application and not an application for resident status for humane or compassionate considerations. The Board in a touchingly sensitive decision determined that Ms. Ganghus met the elements of the "Convention refugee" definition, but could not be considered a refugee because she has an internal flight alternative elsewhere in India.
[6] The gender guidelines, including the internal flight alternative available to women in general, and to rape victims in particular, were taken into account. Although Country Condition Reports are not monolithic in the sense of being solidly uniform, based on the material before it, the panel was entitled to conclude that Sikhs had freedom of movement within India, that there are Sikh communities throughout the country and that there was no substantial ground to believe that Ms. Ganghus would be subject to police persecution outside the Punjab. There would be no objective reason for her to live in hiding in other areas of India and so it would not be unreasonable for the claimant to seek refuge within India.
[7] For these reasons, the application is dismissed. Neither party proposed a question of general importance to be submitted to the Federal Court of Appeal.
"Sean Harrington"
Judge
FEDERAL COURT
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: IMM-5850-03
STYLE OF CAUSE: MANPREET KAUR GANGHUS
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec
DATE OF HEARING: March 24, 2004
REASONS FOR ORDER: The Honourable Mr. Justice Harrington
DATED: March 29, 2004
APPEARANCES:
Me Stewart Istvanffy FOR APPLICANT
Me Suzon Létourneau FOR RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Me Stewart Istvanffy
Montréal, Quebec FOR APPLICANT
Morris Rosenberg FOR RESPONDENT
Deputy Attorney General
of Canada
Date: 20040329
Docket: IMM-5850-03
Montréal, Quebec, March 29, 2004
Present: The Honourable Mr. Justice Harrington
BETWEEN:
MANPREET KAUR GANGHUS
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
Application for judicial review of a decision rendered on June 30, 2003 by Danielle Debbas, member of the Immigration and Refugee Board, in file number MA1-12988, pursuant to Section 72(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
ORDER
The application for judicial review of the decision of the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board signed July 8, 2003 is dismissed.
"Sean Harrington"
Judge