The Federal Court has once again rebuked the Immigration and Refugee Board for the way it probed the genuineness of a refugee claimant's spiritual beliefs and practices.
"The Board is tasked with assessing the applicant's credibility and not the soundness of his theology," Justice Donald J. Rennie wrote in a decision.
"A claimant may have a poor understanding of the minutiae of the religious doctrine but that does not, necessarily, mean his faith is not genuine."
The judge's remarks stem from a decision last year by an IRB adjudicator to deny the refugee claim of Zhang Sheng Wang, who said he feared persecution in his native China because of his practice of Falun Gong.
Wang said he began practising Falun Gong in 2007 to try to cure his insomnia. After three months, he began to feel the benefits and continued to practise with friends at a member's house.
In October 2008, a lookout warned them that officials with the Chinese Public Security Bureau were on their way. While Wang was able to escape, two practitioners were arrested.
With the help of a smuggler, Wang fled to Canada in early 2009 and ended up in Toronto.
In denying Wang's refugee bid, the IRB adjudicator homed in Wang's testimony that he was motivated to join and practise Falun Gong to cure insomnia.
The adjudicator pointed out that Falun Gong prohibits practising out of pure selfinterest.
But the federal judge took issue with this analysis.
"It is not permissible for the board to speculate on the plausibility of a claimant obtaining personal benefits from a religious or spiritual practice, much less base a negative credibility finding on such speculation," Rennie wrote.
The judge also criticized the IRB adjudicator for questioning Wang's testimony that he considers himself both a Buddhist and a Falun Gong practitioner and for stating that the teachings of Falun Gong are "categorical" that practising both will not bring positive results.
"It is not open to the board to opine on whether the manner in which a claimant engages in a spiritual practice is right or wrong according to its foundational texts," Rennie wrote.
The judge said while Wang had credibility issues, the IRB adjudicator committed a "reviewable error," and sent Wang's claim back to the IRB for a second look.
This is not the first time the Federal Court has taken the immigration board to task for the way it assessed a refugee claimant's spiritual beliefs or practices.
Last month, Justice James Russell concluded that the IRB had applied an "overly stringent" and "microscopic examination" of a Chinese man's knowledge of Falun Gong.
Lien Lin had told the immigration board that he, too, feared persecution back home because of his practice of Falun Gong.
An IRB adjudicator denied Lin's claim after concluding that he was not a Falun Gong practitioner because he gave vague answers about what he had learned from his classes and because he had difficulty explaining the purposes of Falun Gong exercises.
However, Russell overturned that decision, saying that the court "imposes a very low standard on refugee claimants to demonstrate religious knowledge as a requirement for proving religious identity."
Original Article
Source: ottawa citizen
Author: Douglas Quan
"The Board is tasked with assessing the applicant's credibility and not the soundness of his theology," Justice Donald J. Rennie wrote in a decision.
"A claimant may have a poor understanding of the minutiae of the religious doctrine but that does not, necessarily, mean his faith is not genuine."
The judge's remarks stem from a decision last year by an IRB adjudicator to deny the refugee claim of Zhang Sheng Wang, who said he feared persecution in his native China because of his practice of Falun Gong.
Wang said he began practising Falun Gong in 2007 to try to cure his insomnia. After three months, he began to feel the benefits and continued to practise with friends at a member's house.
In October 2008, a lookout warned them that officials with the Chinese Public Security Bureau were on their way. While Wang was able to escape, two practitioners were arrested.
With the help of a smuggler, Wang fled to Canada in early 2009 and ended up in Toronto.
In denying Wang's refugee bid, the IRB adjudicator homed in Wang's testimony that he was motivated to join and practise Falun Gong to cure insomnia.
The adjudicator pointed out that Falun Gong prohibits practising out of pure selfinterest.
But the federal judge took issue with this analysis.
"It is not permissible for the board to speculate on the plausibility of a claimant obtaining personal benefits from a religious or spiritual practice, much less base a negative credibility finding on such speculation," Rennie wrote.
The judge also criticized the IRB adjudicator for questioning Wang's testimony that he considers himself both a Buddhist and a Falun Gong practitioner and for stating that the teachings of Falun Gong are "categorical" that practising both will not bring positive results.
"It is not open to the board to opine on whether the manner in which a claimant engages in a spiritual practice is right or wrong according to its foundational texts," Rennie wrote.
The judge said while Wang had credibility issues, the IRB adjudicator committed a "reviewable error," and sent Wang's claim back to the IRB for a second look.
This is not the first time the Federal Court has taken the immigration board to task for the way it assessed a refugee claimant's spiritual beliefs or practices.
Last month, Justice James Russell concluded that the IRB had applied an "overly stringent" and "microscopic examination" of a Chinese man's knowledge of Falun Gong.
Lien Lin had told the immigration board that he, too, feared persecution back home because of his practice of Falun Gong.
An IRB adjudicator denied Lin's claim after concluding that he was not a Falun Gong practitioner because he gave vague answers about what he had learned from his classes and because he had difficulty explaining the purposes of Falun Gong exercises.
However, Russell overturned that decision, saying that the court "imposes a very low standard on refugee claimants to demonstrate religious knowledge as a requirement for proving religious identity."
Original Article
Source: ottawa citizen
Author: Douglas Quan
No comments:
Post a Comment