GERARDO ALBERTO DIAZ-SUAREZ
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
 In the present application, the Applicant, a citizen of Colombia and volunteer at a daycare for underprivileged children from a low-income neighbourhood in Bogota, claims refugee protection on the basis of threats from the FARC. The Applicant's claim is based on fear of FARC due to their threats of harm to him and his family because he refused to supply personal data about the families whose children attended the daycare which he had access to. Therefore, the threats are the key element in the Applicant's claim for protection. With respect to the Applicant's evidence about the threats, the RPD found as follows:
The panel finds it implausible that the FARC would spend years trying to obtain the assistance of the claimant in order to obtain basic data about these impoverished families. Furthermore, if the families were living in such primitive conditions, the panel finds it implausible that they would even have telephone numbers and addresses. When this implausibility was put to the claimant, he explained that even though they were poor, these people would still have a home telephone number or a telephone number at work. Having considered his explanation, the panel still finds the scenario implausible.
(Tribunal Decision, p.4)
 In my opinion, this finding does not meet the test for implausibility findings as stated by Justice Muldoon in Valtchev v. Canada(Minister of Citizenship and Immigration),  F.C.J. No. 1131 at para. 7 as follows:
A tribunal may make adverse findings of credibility based on the implausibility of an applicant's story provided the inferences drawn can be reasonably said to exist. However, plausibility findings should be made only in the clearest of cases, i.e., if the facts as presented are outside the realm of what could reasonably be expected, or where the documentary evidence demonstrates that the events could not have happened in the manner asserted by the claimant. A tribunal must be careful when rendering a decision based on a lack of plausibility because refugee claimants come from diverse cultures, and actions which appear implausible when judged from Canadian standards might be plausible when considered from within the claimant's milieu. [see L. Waldman, Immigration Law and Practice (Markham, ON: Butterworths, 1992) at 8.22]
 Therefore, I find that the RPD's decision was rendered in reviewable error.
Accordingly, for the reasons provided, I set aside the RPD's decision and refer the matter back to a differently constituted panel for re-determination.
"Douglas R. Campbell"
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
STYLE OF CAUSE: GERARDO ALBERTO DIAZ-SUAREZ v. THE
MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Douglas Lehrer FOR THE APPLICANT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Barristers & Solicitors
Toronto, Ontario FOR THE APPLICANT
John H. Sims, Q.C.