Date: 20040902
Docket: IMM-5958-03
Citation: 2004 FC 1211
Ottawa, Ontario, September 2, 2004
PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BEAUDRY
BETWEEN:
OUSMANE SAWADOGO
Applicant
and
MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1] This is an application for judicial review under subsection 72(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27 (Act), of a decision by the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (panel) dated July 10, 2003. In that decision, the panel determined that the applicant did not qualify as a Convention refugee under section 96 of the Act, or as a person in need of protection within the meaning of section 97 of the Act.
ISSUE
[2] Did the panel make a patently unreasonable error in assessing the applicant's credibility?
[3] For the following reasons, I answer in the negative and I would therefore dismiss this application for judicial review.
FACTS
[4] The applicant, a citizen of Burkina Faso, alleges that he has a well-founded fear of persecution because of his perceived political opinion.
[5] Here are the facts as described by the panel. During the elections of May 5, 2002, the applicant received a proposition from one Kader Cosse to find young people with whom national identity cards could be forged so that they could vote several times. On March 30, 2002, the applicant informed Mr. Cosse that the young people contacted did not agree because all of them were already in political parties. Mr. Cosse did not speak to the applicant after that day.
[6] On May 5, 2002, Mr. Cosse accused the applicant of selling products belonging to Mrs. Comparé, the wife of the president of Burkina Faso, and of disappearing with the money. A friend of the applicant told him that Mr. Cosse intended to kill him. Based on this information, the applicant went into hiding on May 21, 2002. Afterwards, his escape was arranged. On August 23, 2002, the applicant left his country; he arrived in Canada the next day and claimed refugee status.
IMPUGNED DECISION
[7] The panel determined that the applicant was not credible regarding important aspects of his refugee claim. It gave the following explanations:
The claimant, according to his testimony, recruited youths on behalf of the CPP. When the panel questioned him about the CPP, the claimant did not know what CPP meant; the only information that he gave the panel was that it was the party in power. The panel finds it implausible that the claimant would recruit people for the CPP without knowing anything about the party.
The claimant said that he was in hiding since May 21, 2002. On June 5, 2002, he returned to Ouagadougu to pick up his visa at the Canadian embassy. The panel finds it improbable that the claimant would leave his hideout and expose himself as he had done. Furthermore, the claimant had no trouble at the airport when leaving the country. The panel finds it implausible that the claimant could have left his country so easily.
ANALYSIS
[8] The decision must be patently unreasonable for the Court to intervene (Aguebor v. Canada (Minister of Employment an Immigration) (1993), 160 N.R. 315 (F.C.A.)).
[9] According to the applicant, the panel only mentioned minor implausibilities which were not important aspects of his claim. As for the applicant's knowledge of the CPP party, he points out that at no time did he say that he was a member of a party or a sympathiser of any political party; he was only asked to find some young people and encourage them to falsify their national cards so that they could vote several times. The panel also criticized the applicant for taking the chance of fleeing the country through the airport, given that he was wanted. The claimant submits that it was one of the only options he had to leave the country. Finally, he submits that the panel made an error requiring the Court's intervention because, he says, it failed to address important aspects of his refugee claim. The panel did not take into account his duties and also the interpreter's testimony at the hearing that an article published in a Burkina Faso newspaper told the story of a young employee accused by Kader Cosse of selling a cargo of beauty products belonging to the wife of President Comparé, and pocketing the money.
[10] One aspect of the panel's jurisdiction is assessing the credibility of refugee claimants. Here, the determination made by the panel is supported by three elements: (1) the applicant's lack of knowledge of the CPP political party, (2) his coming out of hiding to go to the Canadian Embassy and (3) the fact that he left the country through the airport without difficulty.
[11] The Court cannot substitute its opinion for that of the panel. The applicant's explanations were considered. With respect to the document which relates a newspaper story similar to that of the applicant, the applicant had several weeks to file that document. That article was never filed. The panel can therefore not be criticized for not accepting the interpreter's testimony.
[12] I cannot find that the panel made a patently unreasonable error. Accordingly, the application for judicial review is dismissed.
[13] The parties declined the opportunity to submit serious questions of general importance. This case does not raise any question for certification.
ORDER
THE COURT ORDERS that the application for judicial review be dismissed. No question is certified.
"Michel Beaudry"
Judge
Certified true translation
Kelley A. Harvey, BA, BCL, LLB
FEDERAL COURT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: IMM-5958-03
STYLE OF CAUSE: OUSMANE SAWADOGO
and
MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
PLACE OF HEARING: Montréal, Quebec
DATE OF HEARING: August 31, 2004
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER: BEAUDRY J.
DATE OF REASONS AND OF
ORDER: September 2, 2004
APPEARANCES:
Louis Nadeau FOR THE APPLICANT
Edith Savard FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Louis Nadeau FOR THE APPLICANT
Montréal, Quebec
Morris Rosenberg FOR THE RESPONDENT
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Montréal, Quebec