Federal Court Decisions

Decision Information

Decision Content

                                                                                                                                  Date: 20050505

                                                                                                                      Docket: IMM-1185-04

                                                                                                                        Citation: 2005 FC 630

BETWEEN:

                                                             PATRICIA DANSO

                                                                                                                                            Applicant

                                                                           and

                           THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION

                                                                                                                                        Respondent

                                                        REASONS FOR ORDER

PHELAN J.

[1]                The Applicant is a 26 years old female citizen of Ghana who claimed persecution based on membership in a particular social group, namely, women forced into arranged marriages. Her application for refugee status was dismissed by the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (the "Panel") based, principally on credibility as well as the existence of state protection for her and the availability of an Internal Flight Alternative ("IFA").


[2]                The Applicant claimed that she had become betrothed by to the chief of her village when she was 10 years old. After completing junior secondary school, she lived at home for three years. However, in June 1998, she was pressured to go and live with the chief where she was "trained" by his other wives pending her actual marriage.

[3]                In August 1998, she ran away from the chief's home and went to stay with friends in a nearby city. She alleges that the chief was angry at her actions and had organized a search for her.

[4]                In order to avoid being caught and punished, the Applicant went to Cuba where her uncle was the Ghanian ambassador. After two and a half years in Cuba, upon her uncle's ambassadorial term expiring, she came to Canada as a visitor in April 2000.    A little over a year later she applied for refugee status.

[5]                The Panel found that credibility was the principal issue. In that regard the Panel noted the following:

-        the implausibility that a person betrothed to a village chief at a young age would be allowed to complete school;

-        the documentary evidence which indicated that such forced marriages were dying out in Ghana and likely practised only among those who are illiterate, in rural communities, the non-affluent and traditionally minded;


-        the inconsistences in her PIF, in her own story about her communications with her uncle, and about her work history in Ghana;

-        the one year delay in applying for refugee status and her failure to provide a credible explanation for the delay.

[6]                The Panel noted that documentary evidence confirms the evidence of state protection, both from police authorities, and organizations dedicated to assisting women.

[7]                Finally the Panel concluded that she had an IFA in Accra and it did not find plausible that her family or her suitor would pursue her there.

[8]                While there may have been some minor factual errors, the decision as a whole is comprehensive, balanced and accurate. The credibility findings were open to the Panel and were reasonably arrived at based on the evidence. They are clearly not patently unreasonable.

[9]                In addition, the Panel's finding of a viable IFA, for which the standard of review is patent unreasonableness, is fatal to the Applicant's claim. Even if some of the credibility findings could not stand up to a probing examination (a finding which I do not make), there is nothing patently unreasonable about this IFA finding, or indeed about the finding of the existence of state protection.


[10]            For these reasons, this judicial review will be dismissed. There is no question for certification.

              (s) "Michael L. Phelan"            

Judge


                                                             FEDERAL COURT

                            NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET:                                          IMM-1185-04

STYLE OF CAUSE:                  PATRICIA DANSO

                                                 

                                                                                            

                                                                                                                   Applicant

                                                    - and -

                                                     THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP

                                                     AND IMMIGRATION   

                                                     

                                                                                                            Respondent                               

PLACE OF HEARING:                    TORONTO, ONTARIO

DATE OF HEARING:                      THURSDAY, APRIL 21, 2005

REASONS FOR ORDER:              PHELAN J.

                                                                               


                                                                              

DATED:                                     May 5, 2005

APPEARANCES:    

Mr. Yiadom A. Atuobi-Danso

Mr. Kweku Ackaah-Boafo                  FOR THE APPLICANT

Ms. Marina Stefanovic                                                               FOR THE RESPONDENT

SOLICITORS OF RECORD:     

Yiadom A. Atuobi-Danso

Toronto, Ontario                                                              FOR THE APPLICANT                     

John H. Sims, Q.C.

Deputy Attorney General of Canada     FOR THE RESPONDENT


 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.