Two Nigerians face deportation from Canada after failed refuge claim
Two Nigerians identified as Yahaya Oladimeji Gbadamosi and Ms. Taibat Yemisi Gbadamosi who vigorously fought against their deportation from Canada after failed refuge claim now risk being deported back to Nigeria anytime from now.
Penpushing reports that their plights became obvious when the Canada’s Federal Court for judicial review declared that there were no pieces of evidence to support their fear of persecution in Nigeria, their country home
The two Nigerians had dragged the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, Honorable Dominic LeBlanc, to the appellate court claiming that they had the right to stay in Canada despite their prior failure to convince the immigration and refugee board that they fear persecution in Nigeria over their asylum claims.
Penpushing further reports that the Minister, however, opposed the request which led to the judicial review which they had planned to use to stop the March 3, 2024 date proposed for their deportation.
The court, presided over by Judge E. Heneghan rejected the grounds which informed their decision to request for a “stay of their removal,” declaring that they were untenable for the Liberal Party-led Federal Government to grant them stay in Canada.
Penpushing also reports that the court maintained that due to the failure to produce tangible and verifiable pieces of evidence to persuade it to rule in their favour, they must be deported particularly since they failed to justify their claim that they faced “irreparable harm” in their home country.
“Upon motion by Mr. Yahaya Oladimeji Gbadamosi and Ms. Taibat Yemisi Gbadamosi (the “Applicants”) for a stay of their removal scheduled for March 3, 2024 to Nigeria; And upon considering that the underlying application for leave and judicial review seeks to review the decision of an Officer refusing to defer the Applicants’ removal;
‘And upon considering the tri-partite conjunctive test for a stay as set out in Toth v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration) (1988), 1988 CanLII 1420 (FCA), 86 N.R. 302 (F.C.A.), that is a serious issue for trial arising from the underlying application for leave and judicial review, that irreparable harm will result if the relief sought is denied and that the balance of convenience favours the applicants;
‘And upon considering that pursuant to the decision in Baron v. Canada (Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness), 2009 FCA 81 (CanLII), [2010] 2 F.C.R. 311 (F.C.A.), a decision refusing to defer removal requires an applicant for a stay to meet an elevated standard with respect to showing a serious issue for trial’
‘And upon reading the material filed and hearing the submissions of Counsel for the Applicants and the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness (the “Respondent”); And upon considering all the arguments advanced on behalf of the parties;
‘This court orders that the Motion is dismissed since I am not satisfied that the Applicants have shown a serious issue for trial arising relative to the underlying application for leave and judicial review. It is not necessary for me to address the issues of irreparable harm and balance of convenience”, the court in the review docket marked IMM-3162-24 declared
FOOTNOTE: You want to share story with us? You want to advertise with us? You need publicity for product, or service, or event? Contact us on WhatsApp +2348073463653 or email [email protected]
