A Federal Court judge overturns a decision by Canada’s Refugee Protection Division (RPD) that revoked a Pakistani man’s refugee status due to multiple returns to his homeland. The court finds the tribunal overlooked key evidence in the case of Irfan Ahmad, an Ahmadi community member who arrived in Canada in 2014 under the convention refugee abroad program.
Background on the Returns
Immigration authorities note that Ahmad visited the Pakistani consulate in Toronto twice to obtain a passport. Between January 2016 and March 2022, he returned to Pakistan six times, totaling 336 days. The RPD determined he voluntarily re-availed himself of Pakistan’s protection and failed to rebut the presumption with sufficient evidence. The tribunal highlighted inconsistencies in his accounts of persecution, shifting between religious extremists and government authorities.
Court’s Key Ruling
On February 18, Justice Avvy Yao-Yao Go rules in Ahmad’s favor, stating the RPD identified inconsistencies where none existed. The judge criticizes the tribunal for ignoring Ahmad’s precaution of avoiding mosques—a primary target for extremists—during his visits. “While the RPD noted the applicant’s evidence that he did not attend mosque or engage with the broader community,” Go writes, “the RPD never engaged with this evidence when conducting its analysis on the applicant’s intention.”
Instead, the RPD emphasized his large wedding, visit durations, and family trips as signs of lacking fear. Go concludes the tribunal fell short of its duty to provide justified reasons, granting judicial review and remanding the case for redetermination by a new RPD panel.
Legal Perspectives
Ahmad’s lawyer, Daniel Kingwell, welcomes the ruling. “We are very pleased with the judge’s ruling. The court recognized that Mr. Ahmad had provided a number of reasons for returning to Pakistan that were not adequately assessed by the Board – in particular to attend to essential family duties including his marriage, the birth of his child, and the illnesses and deaths of his parents,” Kingwell states. He notes Ahmad’s actions align with ongoing risks, as Ahmadi mosques face frequent attacks, and hopes authorities drop further pursuit to allow Ahmad to support his spouse and disabled children in Canada.
Immigration lawyer Sergio Karas questions the decision, arguing it overlooks the trips’ length and frequency. “The problem with the argument is the length of time and the number of trips that the applicant made,” Karas states. “While brief trips for emergencies may be understandable, multiple trips over an extended period of time, and remaining in the country of alleged persecution for weeks or months, seem to be at odds with the alleged fear of persecution. Also, obtaining Pakistani passports not once, but twice, points to a lack of concern for safety.”
Karas calls for reforms to close loopholes in refugee law, including Bill C-12, Strengthening Canada’s Immigration System and Borders Act, currently under Senate review. He advocates clarifying that returns to the origin country forfeit protection absent emergencies. Kingwell counters that the bill risks barring valid claims filed over a year after arrival, endangering vulnerable groups like domestic abuse victims or war refugees.
