Digests

Decision Information

Decision Content

Velarde-Alvarez v. Canada ( Secretary of State )

IMM-194-94

McKeown J.

9/2/95

7 pp.

Judicial review of CRDD decision applicants, Peruvian citizens, not Convention refugees -- In 1988 terrorist group shooting at male applicant, former police officer, threatening him in 1989 -- Incidents reported to police, but applicant not specifically requesting private protection -- No action taken to protect him after incidents -- Not leaving Peru for two years, during which time no further incidents -- Evidence showing many police officers killed in Peru -- Board holding presumption state able to protect claimant, except in situations of complete breakdown of state apparatus -- Holding Government of Peru in effective control of territory; and situations of war, invasion or total collapse of internal order normally required to support contention of inability to seek protection -- Applicants alleging state unable to offer protection; evidence only most senior police officers given individual protection -- Applications dismissed -- State not obliged to provide private protection in all instances -- Person should request private protection before such unusual treatment considered by Board -- As to whether applicant unable to avail himself of protection of country of nationality, Board holding claimant should seek protection of Government of Peru -- Applicants not Convention refugees merely because many police officers killed in Peru -- Following question certified: "May evidence satisfy the threshold test of `clear and convincing confirmation' of a state's inability to protect the refugee claimant where: (1) there is no state of civil war, invasion or total collapse of internal order, and where (2) the government is otherwise in effective control of its territory, has military, police and civil authority in place, and has made serious efforts to protect its citizens?" -- Immigration Act, R.S.C., 1985, c. I-2, s. 2(1) (as am. by R.S.C., 1985 (4th Supp.), c. 28, s. 1).

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.