Date: 20010301
Docket: IMM-1305-00
Neutral citation: 2001 FCT 136
BETWEEN:
DHARA MANEL LIYANAGE
(also known as Geetha Manel PERERA LIYANAGE)
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF
CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
HENEGHAN J.
[1] Ms. Dhara Manel Liyanage (the "Applicant") seeks judicial review of a decision of the Immigration and Refugee Board, Convention Refugee Determination Division (the "Board") dated February 10, 2000. The Board determined the Applicant not to be a Convention refugee.
[2] The Applicant is national of Sri Lanka. She left that country on October 6, 1999 and arrived in Canada on October 9, 1999, at Montreal, Quebec. She claimed refugee status upon her arrival. The basis of her claim was fear of persecution on the basis of imputed political opinion.
[3] The Board found that the Applicant's evidence was not credible. It found that there was no credible evidence that she had ever been arrested. It also found an absence of credible evidence that she would be at risk if she returned to Sri Lanka.
[4] The Applicant claims that the Board erred in making these credibility findings and argues that the Board improperly based its findings upon its assessment of her demeanour, an unreasonable assessment of her evidence about screaming during her detention by the police in Sri Lanka and the unreasonable microscopic examination of apparent inconsistencies in the evidence provided by the Applicant in the port of entry notes, her Personal Information Form and her sworn evidence before the Board.
[5] However the Applicant frames her arguments, they all relate to a common factor and that is the Board's assessment of her credibility.
[6] The assessment of credibility is the key mandate of the Board. Such findings can be subject to judicial interference in limited circumstances. According to the Tribunal Record, there was evidence before the Board to support its conclusions. I refer to the words of Justice McKeown in Castro v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [1993] F.C.J. No. 787, at paragraph 2:
| Although I might have reached a different determination with respect to the first reason it was reasonably open to the panel to find the Applicant was not credible in respect of this area of his testimony. As was stated in Brar. v. M.E.I., May 29, 1986 when the Applicant raises only a question of credibility and the weight of the evidence it affords no legal basis upon which this Court could properly interfere with the panel. |
ORDER
[7] In the circumstances, the application for judicial review is dismissed.
[8] Counsel did not propose a question for certification.
"E. Heneghan"
J.F.C.C.
Toronto, Ontario
March 1, 2001
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
| COURT NO: IMM-1305-00 |
| STYLE OF CAUSE: DHARA MANEL LIYANAGE |
| (also known as Geetha Manel PERERA LIYANAGE) |
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
| DATE OF HEARING: WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2001 |
| PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO |
REASONS FOR ORDER
| AND ORDER BY: HENEGHAN J. |
DATED: THURSDAY, MARCH 1, 2001
| APPEARANCES BY: Ms. Vania Campana |
| For the Applicant |
| Ms. Marissa Bielski |
| For the Respondent |
| SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Lewis and Associates |
Barristers & Solicitors
223 Main St. N.
Brampton, Ontario
L6X 1N2
| For the Applicant |
| Morris Rosenberg |
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
| For the Respondent |
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Date: 20010301
Docket: IMM-1305-00
Between:
| DHARA MANEL LIYANAGE |
| (also known as Geetha Manel PERERA LIYANAGE) |
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
| REASONS FOR ORDER |
AND ORDER