Date: 20040326
Docket: IMM-653-03
Citation: 2004 FC 458
Ottawa, Ontario, this 26th day of March, 2004
Present: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE O'REILLY
BETWEEN:
MARIA CONSUELO MARTINEZ MEJIA
Applicant
and
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
Respondent
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT AND JUDGMENT
[1] Ms. Maria Consuelo Martinez Mejia claims that she would be at risk of abduction by urban guerrillas if she were returned to her native Colombia. Sadly, both her husband and her son, separately, were kidnapped by unknown persons in 1986 and 1994 respectively. On both occasions, when her family failed to pay a ransom, the abductors killed their captive.
[2] Ms. Mejia failed in her claim for refugee status here, but subsequently asked for a pre-removal risk assessment. The officer who carried out that assessment concluded that Ms. Mejia would be at no greater risk than any other resident of Colombia. Ms. Mejia argues that the officer failed to appreciate that she was likely to be targeted by guerrillas on her return. She asks me to order a re-assessment of her risk by another officer.
[3] With regret, I can find no basis for overturning the officer's decision. I must, therefore, dismiss this application for judicial review. As conceded by counsel for the Minister, Ms. Mejia's circumstances may well merit humanitarian and compassionate consideration, but that is not the issue before me.
I. Issue
[4] There is a single issue in this case: Did the risk assessment officer fail to consider evidence that Ms. Mejia was at greater risk of abduction than other Colombian residents?
II. Analysis
[5] Ms. Mejia's husband was a police officer. It is possible, as Ms. Mejia claims, that whoever abducted him had singled him out because of his profession. Ms. Mejia argues that her son may have been targeted because he was a relative of a police officer. While the eight-year gap between the two abductions might suggest that the two events were unrelated, she argues the contrary - that the long time period between two crimes shows the persistence of guerrillas in eliminating their enemies. By extension, she argues, the guerrillas may well come after her if she returns to Colombia. She suggests that the risk assessment officer failed to consider this possibility, even in the face of documentary evidence referring to the policy of guerrillas to kill, attack and threaten off-duty police officers and their relatives. Her husband was off-duty when he was kidnapped.
[6] However, as the respondent points out, there is no evidence whatsoever that the abduction of Ms. Mejia's husband and son were at all related. In both cases, the perpetrators were unknown. It was reasonable for the risk assessment officer to conclude, as the panel considering her refugee claim had done, that it was very unlikely that Ms. Mejia would be targeted by guerrillas if she returned home. The documentary evidence supporting Ms. Mejia's contention was scant. The officer's failure to mention it does not detract from his analysis of Ms. Mejia's circumstances. Further, it is noteworthy that Ms. Mejia's other children, who continue to reside in Colombia, have not experienced any difficulties.
[7] Therefore, I must dismiss this application for judicial review. Neither party proposed a question of general importance for me to certify and none is stated.
JUDGMENT
THIS COURT'S JUDGMENT IS that:
1. The application for judicial review is dismissed.
2. No question of general importance is stated.
"James W. O'Reilly"
F.C.J.
FEDERAL COURT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD
DOCKET: IMM-653-03
STYLE OF CAUSE: MARIA CONSUELO MARTINEZ MEJIA v.
THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION
PLACE OF HEARING: Toronto, Ontario
DATE OF HEARING: March 2, 2004
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
AND JUDGMENT BY : The Honourable Mr. Justice O'Reilly
DATED: March 26, 2004
APPEARANCES:
Mr. D. Clifford Luyt FOR THE APPLICANT
Mr. Michael Butterfield FOR THE RESPONDENT
SOLICITORS OF RECORD:
WALDMAN & ASSOCIATES FOR THE APPLICANT
Toronto, Ontario
MORRIS ROSENBERG FOR THE RESPONDENT
Deputy Attorney General of Canada
Toronto Ontario