Asylum Application for a Hungarian-Roma Claimant: Failure to Claim in the USA, Credibility, Discrimination vs Persecution, and Availability of State Protection

Case Analysis
Name
Institution

BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE
The claimant was born in Hungary to a Hungarian father and a Roma mother. He suffered
ridicule both as a child and as an adult due to his Roma origin. The discrimination he suffered
escalated into persecution when his father died and he was being threatened to leave the house
his father had left for him. When his employer was found dealing in illegal activities he was
blamed and this further put him at risk.
It is important to note that one of the objectives of the IRPA with regard to refugees is to offer
safe havens to persons with a well founded fear of persecution based on race, religion,
nationality, political opinion or membership among others. [IRPA, s. 3(2)]
I therefore apply for asylum for the claimant on the following grounds;
a) FAILURE TO CLAIM IN THE USA
The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA) recognizes USA as the only designated
safe third country. (IPRA , 2001) It is true that the Canada-USA safe third country agreement
requires that refugee claimants are required to seek for refugee protection in the first country
they arrive in and as such the claimant ought to have sought refugee status in the USA. However
with the revision of immigration laws and the country conditions in the USA, it would not have
been possible for the claimant to gain refugee protection in the USA. The country condition in
the USA is evidenced by the tale of Mamadou, an Ivory Coast citizen, facing similar condition
who was nearly deported back to Ivory Coast from the USA even though his father was killed
and his house burned down.( Kathleen M, 2017). Such country conditions in the USA would not
have made it possible for the claimant to successfully seek asylum in the USA. This therefore
prompted the claimant to seek asylum in Canada. Further, in the case of Canadian Council for
Refugees v Her Majesty, 2007 F C 1262 (Federal Court), 29 October 2007. It was evidenced
that the US laws on refugees can be seen to provide a leeway for refoulment and as such, the
judicial opinion resulted in striking down of Canada’s designation of US as a safe third country.
Further, state practice and statistics show that Canada would be more open to offering refugee
status to the claimant as compared to the USA where the claimant risks refoulment. Canada
annually takes in roughly one out of every ten refugees through its refugee program and as such
it is one of the most preferred destination countries for refugees. (Refugee Law and Policy, 2016)
It is further evident that the agreement between the USA and Canada can be seen as a
circumventing technique by Canada for its refugee protection obligation under domestic law and
international law.
b) CREDIBILITY
The Canadian position with regard to the issue of credibility is that the testimony of a person
seeking asylum in the country is credible. This position was held by the judge in the case of