Date: 20000519
Docket: IMM-3373-99
Between:
MARIA PATRICIA LOPERA ISAZA,
STEPHANY SANTACRUZ LOPERA and
CESAR AUGUSTO LOPERA ISAZA
Applicants
- and -
MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
DENAULT J.
[1] This is an application for judicial review of a decision dated June 15, 1999, by the Convention Refugee Determination Division (the Refugee Division) of the Immigration and Refugee Board determining that the applicants, who are Colombian citizens, are not Convention refugees.
[2] The applicant, Maria Patricia Lopera Isaza, her minor daughter, Stephany Santacruz Lopera, and brother, Cesar Augusto Lopera Isaza, claim to have a well-founded fear of persecution in Ecuador on the basis of their membership in a socio-religious movement known as Divino Salvador.
[3] In 1976, the principal applicant and her brother, aged 12 and 14, respectively, left Colombia with their parents because their father was being victimized for his participation in a leftist movement. In 1978, along with their parents, they became permanent residents of Ecudaor, where they attended school and worked, actively participating in the movement Divino Salvador all the while.
[4] Between 1995 and 1997, the applicants encountered problems with government authorities as a result of demands they made on behalf of Divino Salvador. After being ordered to leave Ecuador, they did so in December 1997 and February 1998, respectively, and claimed refugee status in Canada.
[5] At the commencement of the Refugee Division hearing, the applicants were advised that, in light of their Colombian citizenship, their claim for refugee status would be decided on the basis of their fear of returning to Colombia in the future. The panel found that the evidence failed to establish a reasonable chance of persecution if they were to return to Colombia.
[6] The applicants submit that the panel did not properly assess the evidence: first, it denied the existence of Colombian death squads. The documentary evidence seems, in fact, to corroborate the existence of these death squads and paramilitary groups. However, in my view, it was not unreasonable for the panel to find that the applicants would not be targeted by these groups--despite the applicants' natural inclination, as a result of their education, to become involved in social movements aimed at protecting the disadvantaged, and despite their father having perhaps been a victim of persecution 20 years before, during the 1970s.
[7] The applicants also contend that the Refugee Division should have recognized as an expert witness anAmnesty International volunteer responsible for the Andes region. In my view, it was not unreasonable for the panel to find that, since she had not met the applicants until shortly before the hearing and since she had never set foot in Colombia, this witness had no greater knowledge of the country than the panel which [TRANSLATION]"...has at its disposal abundant documentary proof published by organizations from all over the world, including Amnesty International." In short, the panel followed the rule laid down by the Supreme Court of Canada in Regina v. Marquard :1
| The only requirement for admission of expert opinion is that the "expert witness possesses special knowledge and experience going beyond that of the trier of fact"; R. v. Béland . . . [1987] 2 S.C.R. 398. |
Although the Refugee Division did not recognize her as an expert witness, it did hear her testimony but rejected it as being [TRANSLATION]"...full of exaggerations." This Court should not interfere with the panel's assessment of that evidence.
[8] Accordingly, the application for judicial review is dismissed.
[9] There is no serious question of general importance in this case that requires certification.
Pierre Denault
Judge
Ottawa, Ontario
May 19, 2000
Certified true translation
Mary Jo Egan, LL.B
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
TRIAL DIVISION
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
COURT FILE NO.: IMM-3373-99
STYLE OF CAUSE: MARIA PATRICIA LOPERA ISAZA et al.
v.
MCI
PLACE OF HEARING: MONTRÉAL, QUEBEC
DATE OF HEARING: MAY 18, 2000
REASONS FOR ORDER OF DENAULT J.
DATED: May 19, 2000
APPEARANCES:
ALAIN JOFFE FOR THE APPLICANT
CAROLINE DOYON FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
ALAIN JOFFE FOR THE APPLICANT
Morris Rosenberg FOR THE RESPONDENT
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Date: 20000519
Docket: IMM-3373-99
Ottawa, Ontario, the 19th day of May 2000
Present: The Honourable Mr. Justice Denault
Between:
MARIA PATRICIA LOPERA ISAZA,
STEPHANY SANTACRUZ LOPERA and
CESAR AUGUSTO LOPERA ISAZA
Applicants
- and -
MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
ORDER
The application for judicial review is dismissed.
PIERRE DENAULT
Judge
Certified true translation
Mary Jo Egan, LL.B.
__________________