Boateng v. Canada ( Minister of Employment and Immigration )
92-A-6524
McKeown J.
1/6/93
4 pp.
Refugee Division deciding applicant not Convention refugee -- Finding lacked credibility as implausible arrest of eight leading executive members of large and important organization would not have been reported on by one of human rights monitoring agencies -- As findings supported by evidence, Court not interfering -- As expert panel, Refugee Division entitled to decide weight of contrary evidence -- Refugee Division holding, even if applicant's testimony credible, conditions in Ghana changing -- Evidence on extent to which government encouraging multi-party system and democratic government contradictory -- Deciding weight of documentary evidence providing clear indication of improving human rights situation in Ghana -- Reasoning in Mileva v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1991] 3 F.C. 398 (C.A.) adopted -- Panel must look at what got refugee claimant into trouble and look at changes in conditions in country affecting refugee's particular situation and determine if reasonable chance of persecution -- Refugee Division's conclusions reasonably open to it based on totality of evidence adduced and consequently no error in law -- Fact some of oral and documentary evidence not specifically mentioned by panel in reasons not fatal to decision -- Panel properly weighing evidence as to cogency and reliability -- Court disagreeing detention of returned asylum seekers not treatment amounting to persecution, but holding not applicable to applicant -- No evidence before panel indicating government of Ghana having reason to believe sought refugee status in Canada -- Refugee process confidential -- Nothing of general importance warranting certification of questions of general importance.