into account by the examining officer and the
complainant will be heard orally if the Minister
considers it necessary. Since the request for asylum
was considered prior to the entry into force of the
Immigration and Protection of Refugee’s Law, that
is prior to June 2002, the immigration agent will
not be restricted to assessing facts after the denial
of the initial request but will be able to examine all
the facts and information old and new presented by
the complainant. In this context, it contests the
Committee’s finding in paragraph 7.5 of its
decision which found that only new information
could be considered during such a review.
On 17 May 2007, the State party had informed the
Committee that, on 28 March 2007, the
complainant had filed two appeals before the
Federal Court and that at that point, the
Government of Canada did not intend to implement
the order to return the complainant to Mexico.
On 14 January 2008, the State party informed the
Committee that the two appeals were dismissed by
the Federal Court in June 2007, and that the
immigration agent’s decisions are now final. For
the moment, however, it did not intend to return the
complainant to Mexico. It will inform the
Committee of any future developments in this case.
Complainant’s response
On 5 February 2007, the complainant forwarded the
Committee a copy of the results of his risk
assessment, in which his request was denied and he
was asked to leave the State party. No further
information was provided.
Committee’s decision
The Committee considers the dialogue ongoing.
Case
Dadar, 258/2004
Nationality and country of removal
if applicable
Iranian to Iran
Views adopted on
3 November 2005
Issues and violations found
Removal - article 3
Interim measures granted and State
party response
Yes and State party acceded.
145
Select target paragraph3
Connect to a paragraph
Connect to an entity
Disable highlights
Add to table of contents