Date: 20040813
Docket: IMM-6551-03
Neutral citation: 2004 FC 1128
BETWEEN:
LAURA CHRISTOPHER
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
PHELAN J.
Introduction
[1] The applicant claimed that as a bisexual, she was in danger if she were returned to St. Lucia. The Immigration and Refugee Board (the Board) did not believe her claim of sexual orientation because she produced no credible evidence on this issue. The Board found that her extensive delay in claiming refugee status was a factor in its credibility conclusion. It also held that state protection was available to her. The question is whether any of these findings are patently unreasonable. The answer is in the negative.
Background
[2] The applicant is a female from St. Lucia who had been in Canada intermittently since 1996. She was also in the United States at various times between May 2000 and November 2001. She held a student visa in Canada for three years, which visa expired in September 2002. Within the month following, she filed for refugee status.
[3] She claimed that her father beat her when he learned of a lesbian relationship she maintained for approximately five years. She says that she cannot return to St. Lucia because homosexuality is a crime and the police are both corrupt and ignore complaints about violence against women.
[4] The Board noted that despite this fear, for at least two to three years the applicant took no action to file a claim either in Canada or the United States. In fact, she waited until her student visa in Canada had expired before filing a refugee claim. The Board could not accept her explanation that she did not understand the refugee process, given her education and travel experiences.
[5] The Board noted the absence of any corroborating evidence of the physical attack by her father, such as evidence of injury or medical reports. The Board also noted the absence of any corroborating evidence of her long-term lesbian relationship and drew a negative inference from this absence.
[6] The Board further noted those portions of the "country report" which addressed some of the problems with the police in St. Lucia. But the Board concluded that, in St. Lucia, there is a credible judicial system, a "live and let live attitude" toward homosexuality despite its illegality, as well as various support groups and NGO's to assist the gay community. The Board concluded that, on balance, the presumption in favour of state protection had not been rebutted.
[7] The only problematic part of the Board's decision, a fact acknowledged by both parties, is the reference to her being in a relationship with a man after the end of her lesbian relationship. There was no such evidence. The applicant's counsel argued that this was the central issue in this judicial review.
[8] While there was nothing patently unreasonable about the Board's other findings, there was a factual error in respect to her relationship with a man.
[9] That finding of a relationship with a man was preceded by a reference to her own testimony that she was bisexual. A review of the transcript indicates that she seems to have moved, over time, from heterosexual, to lesbian, to bisexual orientation. The finding that she was bisexual arose from her own declaration that that is what she had become.
[10] The Board analysed the availability of state protection against this background. More importantly they did not accept her allegation that she was bisexual. They did so because she failed to prove it.
[11] The Board's error is not material. In accordance with the principal in Miranda v. Minister of Employment and Immigration [1993] 63 FTR 81, a decision must be read as a whole and only a material error would give rise to a review of the decision.
[12] In the end, this case turned on the applicant's lack of credibility. There is no reason for this Court to interfere with that conclusion.
[13] For these reasons, this judicial review will be dismissed.
[14] The parties acknowledge that there is no question to be certified.
(s) "Michael L. Phelan"
Judge
FEDERAL COURT
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: IMM-6551-03
STYLE OF CAUSE: LAURA CHRISTOPHER v. MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
DATE OF HEARING: WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 4, 2004
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PHELAN
DATED: FRIDAY, AUGUST 13, 2004
APPEARANCES:
Mr. Sina Ogunleye FOR THE APPLICANT
Mr. Tamrat Gebeyehu FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS ON THE RECORD:
Mr. Sina Ogunleye
Toronto, Ontario FOR THE APPLICANT
Mr. Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Ottawa, Ontario FOR THE RESPONDENT