IMMIGRATION — Refugee status — Procedure
Judgement for this Case: Click here!
Applicant’s claim for refugee protection was rejected — Board found applicant not to be credible, would not be at risk if returned to country of origin and political scene in country of origin had changed — Applicant received negative pre-removal risk assessment (“PRRA”) three years later — Officer noted that evidence was required to show that 2009 arrest warrants remained outstanding in 2013 unanswered — Applicant sought judicial review asserting new and significant evidence was overlooked and given no weight or too little weight by PRRA officer — Application granted — Officer failed to recognize that 2009 arrest warrants validated claims found not to be credible by Refugee Board and provided evidence that applicant continued to be at risk — Officer failed to note importance of evidence f newspaper article that reported on 2009 arrest warrants and supported validity of warrants — It was unreasonable to distrust evidence from relatives and friends simply because it came from such sources — It was wrong to ignore evidence because it was like that given at refugee hearing — Officer mishandled report as to complaint of applicant’s wife to police — There was no evidence they took appropriate action to protect her or to investigate as to her assailants