Canada ( Minister of Citizenship and Immigration ) v. Nagra
IMM-5534-98
Rouleau J.
27/10/99
8 pp.
Judicial review of CRDD decision respondent Convention refugee-Respondent, Sikh from India, joining All India Student Sikh Federation (AISSF) in 1978-Actively involved in protesting treatment of Sikhs, advocating for greater rights for Sikhs, organizing AISSF branches-President of AISSF for Rajasthan State in 1981; organizing secretary, member of High Command in AISSF in 1983-Left India in 1984, set up International Sikh Youth Federation (ISYF) (before confrontation at Golden Temple)-Arrived in Canada in February 1985, set up branches of ISYF in various Canadian cities until resignation in 1986-CRDD finding respondent had good grounds to fear persecution should he return to India-Applicant submitting CRDD not addressing Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court, adopted by the United Nations Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court, July 17, 1998, setting out standards concerning crimes against humanity and war crimes-Alleging this instrument clarifying crimes against humanity need not be both systemic and widespread-Applicant adding CRDD completely failed to analyze alleged acts of violence of ISYF to determine whether acts constituted crimes against humanity, and if so, whether respondent complicit in crimes-Application dismissed-Moreno v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1994] 1 F.C. 298 (C.A.) establishing: (1) exclusion clause should be narrowly construed in view of possible persecutory awaiting persons who might otherwise be declared Convention refugees; (2) to invoke exclusion clause, personal involvement in persecutory acts must be established; (3) applicability of exclusion clause not depending on whether claimant charged or convicted of acts set out in Convention; Minister's burden to meet standard of proof embraced by term "serious reasons for considering"-Although CRDD deciding evidence not establishing respondent personally committing crimes against humanity, erred by relying upon fact leaders not convicted of crimes as proof of lack of responsibility for acts-CRDD nevertheless finding as fact respondent not involved while in India with violence of leaders, and not present during Golden Temple confrontation-Making no determination as to obligations of ISYF, but satisfied respondent resigned when became aware of any illegal or terrorist activities-Finding claimant's testimony generally credible-Courts must not revisit facts, weigh evidence-Only where evidence reasonably incapable of supporting tribunal's findings will fact finding be patently unreasonable-Court not convinced CRDD's findings of fact patently unreasonable.