IMMIGRATION — Person in need of protection — Applicant was citizen of India who alleged that he had been victim of politically-motivated threats and violence by supporters of Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (“DMK”) — He made his way through United States and into Canada, where he applied for refugee protection — Refugee Protection Division (“RPD”) determined that applicant was neither Convention refugee nor person in need of protection — RPD concluded that applicant did not fear persecution because his credible fear interview in United States was successful and he had chosen to abandon that claim and come to Canada — RPD also found that New Delhi was viable internal flight alternative (“IFA”) — RPD said applicant had exaggerated his risk from supporters of DMK and had not proven any risk from police in New Delhi — Applicant applied for judicial review of decision of RPD — Application granted — It was illogical and therefore unreasonable for RPD to use Responses to Information Requests (“RIR”) about Punjabi Sikhs as basis for its conclusion that police would not pursue applicant beyond borders of his rural town — That conclusion was central to RPD’s finding of there being IFA for applicant in New Delhi, but it could not be justified because RIR had no relevance whatsoever to applicant’s personal profile as politically active Hindu Tamil from his town, and RIR itself contained some evidence that contradicted RPD’s determination that police would not pursue applicant beyond borders of his town — Matter was remitted to different member of RPD for re-determination
About TSH Editor
This author hasn't written their bio yet.
TSH Editor has contributed 136 entries to our website, so far.View entries by TSH Editor
You also might be interested in
Here is your Weekly TSH newsletter on PNP and other[...]
Tsh_Provinicial Weekly newsletter March 4th 1sr week 2017 Share this:Click[...]
On November 30, 2014, the Government of Canada announced[...]