BETWEEN:
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Let the attached certified transcript of my Reasons for Order delivered orally from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario on the 4th day of May, 2005, now edited, be filed to comply with section 51 of the Federal Court Act.
"Anne L. Mactavish"
Ottawa, Ontario
May 6th , 2005
Toronto, Ontario
--- Upon commencing on Wednesday, May 4, 2005 at
9:40 a.m.
......
THE COURT: Thank you.
You may have a seat. I am prepared to deal with this matter.
The Applicant, Ms Natasha Pope, has failed to appear for the hearing for this application for a judicial review.
Having reviewed the file, I am satisfied that the requisite Notice was provided to Ms Pope at the most recent address for service that Ms Pope has provided to the Court, in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Court Rules, although these Notices have been returned to the Court unclaimed.
In these circumstances, Ms Pope is deemed to have Notice of this proceeding and I am prepared to proceed with this matter in her absence.
Ms Pope's refugee claim was based upon her alleged fear of her step-father, who she claims physically and sexually assaulted her for years.
The Board made no explicit finding that Ms Pope was not credible and thus her allegations must be accepted as true.
The Board rejected Ms Pope's refugee claim on the basis that adequate State protection was available to her in St. Vincent and The Grenadines.
Having reviewed the written submissions by Ms Pope and by the Minister, it appears that Ms Pope's application for judicial review raises two issues - one relating to procedural fairness and the other relating to State protection.
Dealing first with the question of procedural fairness. Ms Pope asserts that she was denied procedural fairness during her refugee hearing by virtue of the conduct of the presiding Member. However, Ms Pope's allegations are not borne out by review of the transcript and, further, are not supported by her affidavit. Given that this argument has no evidentiary foundation, I cannot give it any effect.
Ms Pope's second argument relates to the issue of State protection. In this regard, it should be noted that Ms Pope never approached the authorities in St. Vincent and The Grenadines for assistance.
In addressing the question of the availability of State protection, the presiding Member made reference to a United States Department of State report dealing with violence against women in St. Vincent and The Grenadines. Ms Pope asserts that the Board erred in failing to refer to specific passages in that report.
It is well established that a Board will be presumed to have considered all of the evidence before it. In this case, the Board actually made specific reference to the documentary evidence in issue. What Ms Pope appears to be asserting is that the Board erred in the weight that it ascribed to this particular evidence. In my view, this argument does not identify a reviewable error on the part of the Court and, accordingly, the application for judicial review is dismissed.
Ms Pope, having failed to appear, has not proposed a question for certification. The Minister does not suggest a question and, in my view, none arises here.
Thank you very much. I believe that concludes the matter and we are adjourned.
THE REGISTRAR: This special sitting of the Federal Court is now concluded.
--- Whereupon the court concluded at 9:45 a.m.
FEDERAL COURT
Names of Counsel and Solicitors of Record
DOCKET: IMM-4620-04
STYLE OF CAUSE: NATASHA LYSTRA POPE
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND
IMMIGRATION
Respondent
DATE OF HEARING: MAY 4, 2005
PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO.
REASONS FOR ORDER
AND ORDER BY: MACTAVISH, J.
DATED: MAY 6, 2005
APPEARANCES BY:
FOR THE APPLICANT
Vanita Goela FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
Ms. Natasha Lystra Pope
Etobicoke, Ontario FOR THE APPLICANT
John H. Sims, Q.C.
Deputy Attorney General of Canada FOR THE RESPONDENT