Date: 20040811
Docket: IMM-5234-03
Neutral citation: 2004 FC 1116
BETWEEN:
PIN YU ZHOU
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
PHELAN J.
Introduction
[1] Mrs. Zhou claimed that as a Tian Dao believer in China, she was subjected to religious persecution at the hands of the Public Service Bureau (PSB). The member of the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (the Panel) found her story not to be credible and dismissed her application for refugee status and protection.
Background
[2] Mrs. Zhou said that she joined Tian Dao in September 2000 and attended services regularly in various members' homes. In June 2001, at a service she did not attend, the PSB allegedly raided the home where the service was being conducted. On the advice of a fellow believer she went into hiding.
[3] While in hiding, she says that, she learned that the PSB had been to her home and searched it, looking for her. They also interrogated her husband as to her whereabouts. She says that she was accused of being involved in an illegal religion, of being a key person in that religion, and that she was ordered to report to the PSB office. She said that, when she also heard that the PSB had gone to a relative's home in search of her, she fled China.
[4] The Panel did not find her to be credible on the following basis:
- non-responsiveness, vagueness and inconsistencies in key areas led to doubts of her being a Tian Dao member in China;
- vagueness about events surrounding the PSB raid and particularly her apparent lack of serious efforts to find out what had happened to her fellow believers;
- doubts that the PSB had accused her of being a key person in Tian Dao since the PSB took no action to seek her out for two months and failed to issue any arrest warrants for her.
[5] In light of these concerns, while the Panel accepted that she was a Tian Dao follower in Canada, she was not a follower in China. The Panel held that she had joined Dian Dao in Canada to bolster her claim and that she was unlikely to practice this religion upon return to China.
Analysis
[6] The sole issue in this judicial review is whether the Panel made a patently unreasonable assessment of credibility (see Razzagh v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), [2004] F.C.J. No. 918).
[7] The Panel found the applicant not to be credible based on inconsistencies in her oral testimony and implausibilities in her evidence particularly as regards to what happened to the other fellow members after the police raid. Contrary to the applicant's submissions, the Panel's concern did not lie with the applicant's "inability to provide details" but, rather, with the inconsistencies about her knowledge of what happened to her other believers.
[8] The transcript of the Panel's hearing is replete with a series of vague responses to key issues followed by a sudden recollection of a more detailed nature. Given the overall nature of the responses, even having regard for such factors, amongst others, of minimal education, translation, nervousness, there is nothing unreasonable about the conclusion reached by the Panel.
[9] The applicant attempted to make much out of the Panel's conclusions about the two-month delay by the PSB and the absence of arrest warrants. The applicant says that there is no evidence as to Chinese PSB conduct and procedures, and, one cannot assume that the PSB would act in a manner consistent with Canadian police procedures.
[10] Plausibility findings should be rendered cautiously. It is important to have regard for the fact that refugee claimants come from many and different cultures and circumstances. That which may seem implausible in Canada, may not only be plausible but standard procedure in other cultures and backgrounds.
[11] Bearing this in mind in this case, it is relevant to note that even the claimant's counsel acknowledged that the PSB generally conducts investigations quickly. While this may not be an "admission", it does indicate that the Panel's assumptions were grounded in some reality.
[12] The Immigration and Refugee Board is a specialized tribunal. In regards to its plausibility findings, so long as there is a rational basis for them, so long as the inferences drawn are not unwarranted, these findings should not be overturned. What is irrational or unwarranted depends on the facts in each case.
[13] In this case, the quality of Mrs. Zhou's evidence on key events, the knowledge of and likely behaviour of the PSB, the absence of any corroborative evidence and the presumed expertise of the Board leads to the conclusion that this Panel's findings on credibility are not unreasonable - much less patently unreasonable.
[14] For these reasons, this judicial review will be dismissed.
[15] There is agreement that no certifiable question arises.
(s) "Michael L. Phelan"
Judge
FEDERAL COURT
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: IMM-5234-03
STYLE OF CAUSE: PIN YU ZHOU v. THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO
DATE OF HEARING: JULY 20, 2004
REASONS FOR ORDER: The Honourable Mr. Justice Phelan
DATED: August 11, 2004
APPEARANCES:
Ms. Nadine Tobin FOR THE APPLICANT
Ms. Catherine Vasilaros FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS ON THE RECORD:
Ms. Nadine Tobin
Lewis & Associates
Toronto, Ontario FOR THE APPLICANT
Mr. Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada FOR THE RESPONDENT