Date: 19980625
Docket: IMM-4886-97
OTTAWA, ONTARIO, JUNE 25, 1998.
PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MADAME JUSTICE TREMBLAY-LAMER
BETWEEN:
ALASA HAMIDU,
Applicant,
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION,
Respondent.
ORDER
The application for judicial review is dismissed.
"Danièle Tremblay-Lamer"
JUDGE
Date: 19980625
Docket: IMM-4886-97
BETWEEN:
ALASA HAMIDU,
Applicant,
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION,
Respondent.
REASONS FOR ORDER
TREMBLAY-LAMER J.:
This is an application for judicial review of a decision of the Convention Refugee Determination Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board ("Board") wherein it was determined that the Applicant is not a Convention refugee.
The Applicant is a citizen of Ghana. His fear of persecution stems from his involvement in the leadership of a farmers' group. He alleges that the group approached the Regional Commissioner to obtain licences to import farm equipment which was in shortage on the domestic market. The Commissioner did not respond to the request. A second request was made six months later. This time, the farmers were informed that no licences would be issued. To protest the Commissioner's decision, the farmers decided to withhold their produce and organize a demonstration. Government officials retaliated by requiring that all leaders of the group report to the nearest police station. Fearing he would be arrested, the Applicant fled Ghana.
He made his refugee claim in Canada in 1991. It took several years before his claim was adjudicated because an interpreter proficient in the Kusasi[1] and English languages could not be found. After numerous unsuccessful attempts to locate an interpreter, the Board finally decided to assess for itself his competency in English to determine whether it could proceed with the hearing of his claim.
It convened a hearing and asked counsel for the Applicant and the RCO to question the Applicant regarding his proficiency. Based on their observations, the panel members came to the conclusion that he had "no difficulty understanding the English language and his ability to speak English gives him a reasonable opportunity to present the evidence on which he bases his fear of persecution". Given its conclusion, the Board decided to proceed with the hearing of the claim without the presence of an interpreter.
The claim was eventually dismissed. The Board accepted the credibility of the Applicant with respect to his alleged experience of past persecution in Ghana. However, it held that he did not face a reasonable chance of prospective persecution in light of the change of conditions in Ghana.
In my opinion, the Board proceeded in an appropriate manner. Faced with information that a Kusasi interpreter could not be found, and after several adjournments to find an interpreter, it decided to hold a preliminary hearing to determine whether the Applicant was proficient enough in English to state the grounds of his claim and understand the proceeding without the aid of an interpreter. It found so, based mainly on the fact that he was able to provide information to be included in his personal information form to a consultant in English and that he communicated at his workplace for three years in English.
I see no other alternative available. The Applicant's claim had been pending for approximately six years and it required a final resolution. If his abilities were determined to be sufficient for him to state his claim, it was reasonable to proceed with the hearing.
Moreover, even after it determined that he was proficient, the Board gave him the opportunity to submit more evidence by way of a sworn statement. It also took great pains to question him during his testimony in order to clarify what he was saying. In the present circumstances, there is no breach or denial of natural justice.
In any event, it would be pointless to return the matter back to another panel. The Board accepted that the Applicant's story was credible but found, based on the documentary evidence, that he did not have a prospective fear of persecution in light of the changes in country circumstances in Ghana. The Board was entitled to give more weight to the documentary evidence which contained objective information on the recent country circumstances.
For these reasons, the application for judicial review is dismissed.
Neither counsel recommended certification of a question in this matter. Therefore, no question will be certified.
"Danièle Tremblay-Lamer"
JUDGE
OTTAWA, ONTARIO
June 25, 1998.
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF SOLICITORS AND SOLICITORS ON THE RECORD
COURT FILE NO.: IMM-4886-97
STYLE OF CAUSE: ALASA HAMIDU v. MCI
PLACE OF HEARING: Toronto, Ontario
DATE OF HEARING: June 22, 1998
REASONS FOR ORDER OF The Honourable Madame Justice Tremblay-Lamer
DATED: June 25, 1998
APPEARANCES
Ms. Maureen Silcoff FOR THE APPLICANT
Mr. Jeremiah Eastman FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS ON THE RECORD:
Lewis & Associates FOR THE APPLICANT Toronto, Ontario
Mr. George Thomson FOR THE RESPONDENT Deputy Attorney General of Canada