Digests

Yontem v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)

IMM-1834-04

2005 FC 41, Kelen J.

18/1/05

12 pp.

Judicial review of denial of refugee claim, protection by Refugee Protection Division of Immigration and Refugee Board--Principal applicant, Turkish national claiming well-founded fear of persecution because of Alevi faith, leftist political opinion--Applicant's wife, children basing application on principal applicant--Applicant alleging as Alevis in predominantly Sunni Muslim community, family facing threats, harassment from members of extremist Sunni organizations--Also claiming routinely detained, beaten by Turkish authorities--Applicant, family, moving within Turkey before leaving for Canada--Immigration officer conducting interview with principal applicant when principal applicant entering Canada deposing applicant denied being persecuted in Turkey due to political beliefs, political opinions, memberships in social organizations--Applicant's personal information form (PIF) stating applicant Leftist, experiencing problems with Turkish authorities--PIF also stating answers given at immigration interview not mentioned in port of entry notes--Board denying applicant's claim primarily on basis of credibility--Inconsistencies between information provided at port of entry and in PIF so critical applicant's evidence seriously undermined, rendering evidence untrustworthy-- Board also finding documentary evidence not supporting well-foundedness of applicant's fear of persecution since documents stating anti-Alevi prejudice declining in Turkey, Turkish Alevis encountering fewer difficulties than Kurdish Alevis--Applicant explaining discrepancy result of interpreter's inadequate translation of information given-- Board considering applicant's explanation but determining port of entry notes nonetheless reliable--Board not committing reviewable error, acting appropriately by notifying applicant port of entry notes issue and providing applicant with reasonable opportunity to explain inconsistency before drawing adverse inference--Board also providing cogent reasons for rejecting applicant's explanation--Nothing in port of entry notes suggesting to Board translation faulty-- Applicant repeating, relying on many details recorded in notes during hearing--Open to applicant to subpoena both immigration officer, interpreter to testify at hearing to challenge accuracy of notes--Applicant introduced affidavit of other Turkish interpreter claiming port of entry notes interpreter known for making mistakes at other interviews-- Affidavit also stating immigration authorities no longer using interpreter due to incompetence--Such evidence not before Refugee Board--Magnitude of discrepancy between interpreted version of port of entry notes and applicant's evidence "beyond incompetence"--That said, in interests of justice applicant should be given opportunity to subpoena author of port of entry notes and interpreter--Onus on applicant, not Refugee Board, to make persons available for examination at hearing to discredit port of entry notes-- Applicant failing to exercise power--Hearing to be reopened to allow applicant to call additional evidence to explain discrepancy between port of entry notes, PIF, vive voca evidence--Board member having to reconsider decision whether discrepancy, omissions in port of entry notes reasonably explained--Application allowed.