Pour-Shariati v. Canada ( Minister of Employment and Immigration )
A-721-94
MacGuigan J.A.
10/6/97
2 pp.
In [1995] 1 F.C. 767 (T.D.), following question certified: whether indirect persecution described in Bhatti v. Canada (Secretary of State) (1994), 84 F.T.R. 145 (F.C.T.D.), basis for claim to Convention refugee status where no evidence of direct persecution against applicant and if so, whether CRDD required to assess whether evidence of indirect persecution when applicant does not raise issue before it-Bhatti's recognition of concept of indirect persecution as principle of refugee law overruled-Statement of Nadon J. in Casetellanos et al. v. Canada (Solicitor General) (1994), 89 F.T.R. 1 (F.C.T.D.), agreed with: since indirect persecution does not constitute persecution within meaning of Convention refugee, claim based on it should not be allowed-Concept of indirect persecution going directly against decision of Court in Rizkallah v. Minister of Employment and Immigration (1992), 156 N.R. 1 (F.C.A.), where held there had to be personal nexus between claimant and alleged persecution on one of Convention grounds-One of grounds membership in particular social group, ground allowing for family concerns in appropriate case-CRDD cannot be faulted for not deciding issue not raised before it-Appeal dismissed and both included questions answered in negative.