Date: 20000225
Docket: IMM-6246-98
BETWEEN:
WEI XIAO YUAN
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP
AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
REED J.:
[1] The applicant seeks an order setting aside a decision of a visa officer refusing to issue the applicant an immigrant visa. The applicant applied for admission to Canada, indicating that her intended occupation was that of translator/interpreter (NOC 5125).
[2] The employment qualifications in NOC 5125 for interpreters and translators reads, in part:
| A bachelor"s degree in translation or a related discipline is required, and specialization in interpretation, translation and terminology at the graduate level is usually required. |
[3] Initially, there was some question about whether or not a bachelor"s degree is required for immigration purposes, because the educational and training factor ("ETF" ) points given for those occupations, pursuant to Factor 2 of Schedule I of the Immigration Regulations, 1978, is only 15 and this equates to a college degree or specialized training program. An occupation for which a university degree is required receives 17 points. Equally, the Education/Training indicators ("ETI" ) are 5+, 6+, 8+, R. Five (5), as a descriptor, equates to an apprenticeship or specialized training program. Six (6), as a descriptor, equates to a college or technical school certificate.
[4] The apparent discrepancy was explained because the NOC 5125 classification is a broad category, which includes sign language interpreters. Those individuals only require a college or other specialized training program. Subsection (2) of Factor 2 states that when more than one ETI is identified in NOC for a given occupation, the lowest rating shall be used for the ETF. Thus, the points awarded for the ETF, and the ETI indicators, are not inconsistent with a bachelor"s degree being required for a translator/interpreter, other than a sign language interpreter.
[5] The applicant"s second concern is that the visa officer did not accept her educational qualifications as equivalent to a bachelor"s degree. The applicant holds a certificate from the Shaanxi Institute of Business Management, consequent on following a three year course of study in the Institute"s Department of English. She also holds a certificate from the Xi"an Jiaotong University. The certificate states that the applicant studied at its Department of English for two years and that her main subjects of study were English writing, and Chinese and English translation.
[6] The applicant states in her affidavit:
| I have 5 years of post secondary studies. I have a 3 year college education certificate from the Shaanxi Institute of Business Management. This is regarded internationally as a degree level otherwise I would not have been accepted to pursue graduate studies at Xi"an Jiaotong University. |
| My graduate studies at Xi"an Jiaotong University where I majored in Advanced Study of English language, Interpretation and translation is equivalent to a Master"s degree level. |
[7] The visa officer assessed the applicant"s qualifications differently. She states in her affidavit:
| 4. I then reviewed with Ms. Wei the details of her education. Ms. Wei showed me the original certificate of her three year English program (1981 - 1984) at the Shaanxi Institute of Business Management ... Ms. Wei told me that she did not have an original certificate from her two year English course at Xi"an Jiaotong University (1984 - 1986). Instead, she produced a handwritten letter (with notarized English translation), dated November 28, 1997 ... The letter indicated in Chinese characters that it was a "JINXIU ZHENGMING", or "Advanced Studies or Refresher Course Certification". I noted that this was omitted from the English translation. |
| 5. The letter from Xi"an Jiaotong University was issued on November 28, 1997, eleven years after Ms. Wei completed the course. The certificate from the Shaanxi Institute of Business Management was issued on September 12, 1995, also eleven years after Ms. Wei graduated from that Institute. I asked Ms. Wei for the transcripts of her grades and courses in these programs. Ms. Wei stated that she did not bring them. |
| 6. In China, colleges, universities and institutes offer three-year certificate programs and four-year undergraduate degree programs. Undergraduate programs of less than four years are not the equivalent of, and do not do not [sic] qualify as, undergraduate degree programs. When students graduate from university or college in an undergraduate degree program, they usually receive two certificates. The completion/graduation certificate describes the subject and states the dates of attendance, certifying that the holder has completed the course of study. The degree certificate, usually issued as a separate document, states the dates of study, subject and degree awarded, i.e., a bachelor"s degree. On its own, a completion/graduation certificate does not constitute a bachelor"s degree. Some universities, colleges and institutes have been known to combine the completion/graduation and degree certificates in one document. Although not the norm, when this occurs it is clearly indicated on the document in Chinese characters. There was no indication on Ms. Wei"s graduation certificate from the Shaanxi Institute of Business Management that a bachelor"s degree was awarded. Rather, the certificate merely indicates that Ms. Wei completed a college level program with a major in English. Contrary to what Ms. Wei"s initially asserted at the interview, her three year program at the Shaanxi Institute of Business Management was not the equivalent of a bachelor"s degree and is not recognized as such. I would also note that in the affidavit Ms. Wei has filed in this proceeding, she admits that she does not have a degree. |
[8] Counsel for the applicant"s argument is that the visa officer did not adequately assess whether the applicant"s Shaanxi certificate was the equivalent of a university degree. She simply asserted that the certificate was not a degree.
[9] The visa officer assessed the applicant"s qualifications on the basis of the documentation that the applicant presented to her, and on the basis of the visa officer"s knowledge of the status of certificates and degrees given by Chinese educational institutions. I am not persuaded that the visa officer is required to accept an applicant"s assertion that her qualifications are the equivalent to those required, merely because the applicant says it is. If an applicant wishes to rely on equivalency, I think it is incumbent on that person to bring objective evidence to the interview to establish the equivalency, or to ask for time in order to obtain it. On the basis of the record as it exists, I could not conclude that the visa officer made an unreasonable decision.
[10] The last point raised by the applicant is whether or not the visa officer was a properly designated immigration officer. She is what is called a member of the "locally engaged staff". The cross-examination reveals that she took courses given by the respondent"s department to prepare her to do the work of a visa officer. At one point in her cross-examination the applicant said that she had not written examinations in Canada, but in Hong Kong. The document that appointed her as a Designated Immigration Officer, however, states that she had "attended and passed the training course in Canada".
[11] Counsel for the respondent argues that I should consider her to have taken the courses in Canada but passed the examinations in Hong Kong. In any event, I accept the argument that it is not open to the applicant to question the officer"s designation on the basis of the apparent discrepancy between the designation document and the visa officer"s cross-examination. I accept the assessment that the visa officer was properly designated pursuant to section 109 of the Immigration Act, and it is not open to the applicant to go behind that designation in the manner in which she attempts to do so in this case.
[12] For the reasons given the application will be dismissed.
"B. Reed"
J.F.C.C.
TORONTO, ONTARIO
February 25, 2000
FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
| COURT NO: IMM-6246-98 |
| STYLE OF CAUSE: WEI XIAO YUAN |
| - and - |
| THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP |
AND IMMIGRATION
| DATE OF HEARING: THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2000 |
| PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO |
| REASONS FOR ORDER BY: REED J. |
DATED: FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 2000
APPEARANCES: Ms. Mary Lam
For the Applicant
Mr. Stephen H. Gold
For the Respondent
| SOLICITORS OF RECORD: Cecil L. Rotenberg, Q.C. |
Barristers & Solicitors
United Centre
808-255 Duncan Mill Road
North York, Ontario
M3B 3H9
| For the Applicant |
Morris Rosenberg
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
For the Respondent
| FEDERAL COURT OF CANADA |
Date: 20000225
Docket: IMM-6246-98
Between:
| WEI XIAO YUAN |
Applicant
- and -
| THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION |
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER