Altun—ignoring evidence of a corrupt judiciary

Altun v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2012 FC 1034 (CanLII)

Judge: Justice Shore; Date heard: August 28, 2012; Date decided: August 29, 2012; Counsel for Altun: Lorne Waldman; Counsel for Minister: Rick Garvin; Place of Hearing: VIDEOCONFERENCE.

The applicant was a Kurdish citizen of Turkey, a medical doctor, who had been convicted and served a sentence for signing a certificate of sick leave. He claimed that “the charges were false, motivated by ethnic persecution in his regard” (para. 2).

Justice Shore found that the RPD had failed to consider all of the evidence, stating:

It is recognized by this Court that, if all the documents had been adequately considered, the reasons would have demonstrated, at the very least, a logical inherence derived from the analysis of significant, pertinent, detailed evidence, thus, within a framework of potential outcomes as set out by the Supreme Court… (para. 3)

The RPD appeared to be finding in favour of the applicant: “The RPD stated the matter was credible and expressed sympathy for the case. In addition, the RPD stated the allegations were trustworthy. It is difficult to understand how the RPD was of the opinion that there was not enough evidence. …” (para. 5).

However, the RPD found the applicant’s situation one of prosecution rather than persecution, despite significant evidence of corruption in the judiciary. Therefore the case was overturned.