Date: 20010405
Docket: IMM-2252-00
Neutral Citation: 2001 FCT 294
BETWEEN:
AKBAR KHAN
Applicant
- and -
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
[1] The applicant seeks to set aside a decision of the Refugee Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (the "Board") dated March 31, 2000, whereby the Board dismissed his claim for refugee status in Canada.
[2] The applicant, born on June 9, 1960, is a citizen of Afghanistan. He claims to have a well-founded fear of persecution by reason of his political opinions and membership in a particular social group, namely, families who are victims of the Taliban government. He left his country for Pakistan on May 24, 1999, where he remained until June 19, 1999, and arrived in the United States on June 21, 1999. He entered Canada on the same day and claimed refugee status on June 22, 1999.
[3] The Board concluded that the applicant had not provided credible or trustworthy evidence and, as a result, the Board dismissed his refugee claim. In my view, the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the Board's conclusion regarding his lack of credibility is unreasonable. I have carefully considered Mr. Nadler's submissions, both oral and in writing, in the light of the evidence and more so in the light of the applicant's viva voce evidence. Regrettably for the applicant, Mr. Nadler has not been able to convince me that the Board erred.
[4] To be more precise, let me say that the Board did not commit any error in concluding that the applicant's credibility was affected by his failure to mention in his Personal Information Form the fact that the houseguest, suspected of being a member of the Northern Alliance, was a friend of his brother. Let me also say that I cannot fault the Board for concluding that the applicant's behaviour in openly speaking out against the Taliban, with a view of either reforming them or softening their position, is implausible.
[5] In conclusion, it seems to me that it cannot be disputed that the applicant, during the course of his viva voce evidence, was vague in his answers to most relevant questions asked by the Board. Particulars were not his forte. One would certainly have expected him to be more specific, considering that he was not living in a highly populated city, but in a village of 700 to 800 people. As the applicant has not satisfied me that the Board made any error, either of fact or of law, his application for judicial review shall be dismissed.
Marc Nadon
JUDGE
O T T A W A, Ontario
April 5, 2001.