Date: 19990820
Docket: IMM-3721-98
BETWEEN:
ABDUL RAFI MIR
Applicant
AND:
THE MINISTER
Respondent
REASONS FOR ORDER
TEITELBAUM, J:
[1] This is an application for judicial review of a decision of the Refugee Determination Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board (Board) dated July 2, 1998, stating that the applicant, a citizen of Pakistan, is not a Convention refugee as defined by section 2(1) of the Immigration Act (Act).
FACTS
[2] The applicant was born in Sehdary, Pakistan. He arrived in Canada on June 6, 1996 and claimed refugee status on July 2, 1996. The Board determined that the applicant was not a Convention refugee. The applicant claimed Convention refugee status on the basis of his political opinions. He alleges to be a member of the Jammu and Kashmir People"s National Party (JKPNP).
[3] According to the Board, the applicant was operating a clothing business in Deona Mundi, Gujrat. In 1980, the applicant moved to Azad Kashmir and started a business in Bagh and then moved to Garhi to start another business. This was in 1994.
[4] The applicant"s wife and children, at the time of the Board"s decision, remained in Deona Mundi.
[5] The applicant alleges that in 1991 he became a member of the JKPNP. In the "middle" of 1994, he states he became area organizer in Bagh and became area organizer in Garhi in December 1994.
[6] The applicant alleges that he was active in the JKPNP from March 1995 to November 1995 (see Board"s decision, page 1). He claims he was accused by the Hizbul Mujahidin (HM) of being an Indian Government agent. As a result, he was beaten and his clothing store was looted.
[7] On December 24, 1995, the claimant states he was hiding at his cousin"s poultry farm when some HM members entered the farm compound. He was kidnapped. The applicant and his cousin were able to escape.
BOARD"S DECISION
[8] The Board, in its decision, states:
| In support of his belonging to the JKPNP, the claimant submitted a membership card and a letter dated July 25, 1996, that were both examined by Immigration Canada Intelligence Services, along with the claimant"s Identity Card. The conclusions of the expert are that the ID Card is "probablement authentique", while the membership card "peut être un document de fantaisie" and the letter is "probablement un document de fantaisie". In all cases, the expert specifies that he did not have a specimen of comparison. Nonetheless, in the two cases where the expert concludes that the document could be "de fantaisie", the expert explained his reasons. |
| Counsel for the claimant argued that the qualifications of the expert had not been proven, that he was not an expert in Pakistani politics, and that the absence of a document of comparison limited the value of the expertise. The Refugee Claim Officer (RCO) on the other hand indicated that the expert has examined several documents for the tribunal, several of which were from Pakistan. The tribunal also examined the originals of the documents to better understand the conclusions of the expert. Even though the expert might not be an expert concerning Pakistani politics, he certainly is as far as modes of impression, typography and type of paper are concerned. The tribunal has therefore decided to rely on the expert"s reports to some extent, keeping in mind that there was no document of comparison. |
| According to the expert, the JKPNP membership card as printed by colour photocopying, which is too expensive a means to be used to reproduce mass document such as membership cards and, for this reason, seriously doubts the authenticity of the card. The tribunal would not conclude to the non-authenticity of the card based only on this expertise. The claimant testified in detail concerning his membership card. He had a good knowledge of the content of the card and of its aspect. His counsel argued that this was indication hat the card was authentic. The tribunal is not prepared to draw this conclusion: it merely indicates that the claimant has observed the card very well, either because it has been in his possession for a long time or because he had it fabricated. He card, which bears the issuing date of August 11, 1995, contains as the claimant"s address the main bazaar in Bagh. This contradicts the claimant"s testimony that he has moved from Bagh to Gahri in December 1994 and had become area organizer in Gahri at that time. Furthermore, the card bears as "place if (sic) issue" the indication "Bagh". The typo error was explained by the claimant as being an error. The Bagh indication also contradicts the claimant"s testimony to the effect that the card was issued in Rawalpindi and filled out by an office clerk in Rawalpindi. Had the only problem been the mention of Bagh rather than Gahri, the tribunal might have been prepared to accept the claimant"s explanation that he had not yet indicated his change of address to the party. Nonetheless, in view of all the above-mentioned elements, the tribunal concludes, on the balance of probabilities, that he JKPNP membership card of the claimant is not authentic. |
| The letter dated July 7, 1996 also refers to the claimant as living in Bagh. The above-mentioned comments on this issue apply. The expert had serious doubts about the authenticity of this document for the following reasons: it was photocopied in colour, a very expensive means of reproduction, the letterhead was only in English, the paper was thicker than what is normally used for a letter destined to be folded in an envelope and the size of the paper corresponded to the North American size rather to the European used in Pakistan. Based on its specialized knowledge, the tribunal agrees with counsel for the claimant that the letterhead being in English only is no indication that the document was not produced in Pakistan. The tribunal has also seen in other files from Pakistan thick paper. Nonetheless, the tribunal agrees with the expert that the aper size in Pakistan is not the same as in North-America. The tribunal therefore concludes, on the balance of probabilities, that the letter from the JKPNP is not authentic. |
[9] The Board concluded that the applicant "has not established on a balance of probabilities that he is a member of the JKPNP".
ISSUE
[10] The main issue in this judicial review is to determine if the Board could rely on the report of the "expert" as to the authenticity of the membership card and letter submitted by the applicant along with his Identity Card.
DISCUSSION
[11] In this judicial review application, I must determine if, based on the evidence before the Board, it was reasonable for it to conclude that, in the Board"s opinion, the documents, on a balance of probabilities, were not authentic.
[12] I have read all of the written submissions and heard the oral arguments.
[13] I am satisfied that it was open to the Board to accept the expert"s opinion as it relates to the documents.
[14] I may have decided otherwise, but it is not for me to substitute my opinion for that of the Board.
[15] The documents were examined by the Canadian Intelligence Service. It may be that the person acting for the Canadian Intelligence Service is not an expert in Pakistani politics but this fact does not disqualify the person from giving his opinion on the documents submitted for examination.
[16] With regard to the issue of whether the person who examined the documents is or is not an expert. I can only say that the Board considered this person as an expert and it was reasonable for it to do so (see pages 145 to 154 of Tribunal Record for the expert"s report).
[17] In addition to the Board"s conclusion with regard to the authenticity of the documents produced, the Board also questions the credibility of the applicant"s involvement in the JKPNP.
[18] I see no reason to interfere with the Board"s decision.
CONCLUSION
[19] The application for judicial review is denied.
[20] No question was submitted for certification.
"Max M. Teitelbaum"
J.F.C.C.
Ottawa, Ontario
August 20, 1999