Date: 20040106
Docket: IMM-5030-03
Citation: 2004 FC 6
Ottawa, Ontario, this 6th day of January 2004
Present: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SIMON NOËL
BETWEEN:
ANISUL HOQ KHAN
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER AND ORDER
[1] The Applicant has presented a Motion under Rule 369 for reconsideration pursuant to Rules 397 and 399 of the Federal Court Rules, 1998 of my Order dated October 30th, 2003 in which the Applicant's request for leave to commence judicial review of an Immigration and Refugee Board's decision (Refugee Protection Division) dated June 11th, 2003 was dismissed. There is no issue regarding extension of time since Counsel for the Applicant only received the Order on November 24th, 2003.
[2] I have reviewed all the documentation (which included the Refugee Protection Division's decision) and all of the written arguments submitted both at the initial stage as well as those presented at the reconsideration stage of the proceedings.
[3] The Motion for reconsideration will not to be granted because I did have at my disposal all the documentation and memoranda submitted by both parties at the initial stage and I did not overlook or omit any of the arguments presented.
[4] A close reading of the Refugee Board's decision dated June 11th, 2003 makes it clear that there is a serious problem with the Applicant's credibility regarding the claim. A few references from page 2 of the decision help illustrate this conclusion :
" Throughout his testimony, the claimant evaded questions, and remained vague as to his activities with the Awami League ... he managed to get in and out of Bangladesh to travel to Malaysia and Spain without any problem whatsoever, and he returned to his country where he feared persecution ... it is surprising ... His answers were of a vague, general and superficial nature ... he evaded the question and answered that the country was in chaos and that there were strikes ..."
Read as a whole, the decision clearly identifies specific examples where the Applicant's claim lacks credibility and because it is comprehensive, permits the reader to easily grasp the reasoning behind the conclusion. Furthermore, the other conclusions regarding the inclusion were significant factors which also lead to this determination.
[5] I was and still am of the opinion therefore that the Tribunal's decision regarding the inclusion was reasonable. The arguments concerning the exclusion became of secondary importance since the facts in the matter lead me to the conclusion that a decision based on the inclusion would stand to a review. (See Moreno v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration) [1994] 1 F.C. 298).
THIS COURT ORDERS THAT:
The Motion for reconsideration is dismissed without cost.
"Simon Noël"
Judge
FEDERAL COURT OF APPEAL
NAMES OF COUNSEL AND SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: IMM-5030-03
STYLE OF CAUSE: ANISUL HOQ KHAN vs. MCI
MOTION DEALT WITH IN WRITING WITHOUT APPEARANCE OF PARTIES
REASONS FOR ORDER BY: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SIMON NOËL
DATED: January 6th, 2004
WRITTEN REPRESENTATIONS BY:
|
Me Jean-Michel Montbriand |
FOR THE APPLICANT |
|
|
FOR THE RESPONDENT |
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
|
Montréal (Québec) H3G 1J1 |
FOR THE APPLICANT |
|
Deputy Attorney General of Canada Federal Department of Justice Complex Guy-Favreau Montréal (Québec) H2Z 1X4 |
FOR THE RESPONDENT |