OMOWALE ISMAEEL MAKANJU Applicant v. THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION, 2023 FC 490

Date: 20230406 Docket: IMM-4451-22 Citation: 2023 FC 490 Toronto, Ontario, April 6, 2023 PRESENT: The Honourable Madam Justice Heneghan BETWEEN:OMOWALE ISMAEEL MAKANJUApplicantandTHE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATIONRespondent REASONS AND JUDGMENT [1]Mr. Omowale Ismaeel Makanju (the “Applicant”) seeks judicial review of the decision of an Officer (the “Officer”) refusing hisPre-Removal Risk Assessment (“PPRA”) application made pursuant to

section 112 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act,S.C. 2001, c. 27 (the “Act”). [2]The Applicant is a citizen of Nigeria. Following his arrival in Canada on October 5, 2018, he claimed refugee protection on thebasis of a dispute with a man in Nigeria about a local kingship. His claim was rejected by the Immigration and Refugee Board,Refugee Protection Division on May 22, 2019, on grounds of credibility. [3]The Applicant appealed to the Immigration and Refugee Board, Refugee Appeal Division.

His appeal was dismissed by adecision dated September 20, 2019. [4]The Applicant submitted his PRRA application on June 21, 2021. He raised a new risk, that is a claim of risk from theauthorities due to his involvement with the Indigenous People of Biafra (“IPOB”) movement in Niagara. He did not raise this riskin connection with his claim for refugee protection. [5]The Officer denied the Applicant’s PRRA application on the grounds that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establishhis claim. [6]The Applicant argues that the Officer failed to consider the evidence he submitted in support of the new risk.

That evidenceconsisted of text messages from his wife. [7]The decision is reviewable on the standard of reasonableness, following the decision in Canada (Minister of Citizenship andImmigration) v.

Vavilov, 2019 SCC 65 , [2019] 4 S.C.R. 653 (S.C.C.). [8]In considering reasonableness, the Court is to ask if the decision under review ""bears the hallmarks of reasonableness -justification, transparency and intelligibility - and whether it is justified in relation to the relevant factual and legal constraints thatbear on the decision""; see Vavilov, supra at paragraph 99. [9]Upon considering the evidence submitted and the submissions, both written and oral, of the parties, I am not persuaded theOfficer made a reviewable error. The decision reflects an appreciation of the evidence submitted by the Applicant.

It is the task ofthe Officer, not of the Court, to weigh the evidence. The decision meets the applicable standard of review and the application forjudicial review will be dismissed. JUDGMENT in IMM-4451-22 THIS COURT’S JUDGMENT is that the application for judicial review is dismissed. There is no question for certification. “E. Heneghan” Judge FEDERAL COURT SOLICITORS OF RECORD

DOCKET: IMM-4451-22 STYLE OF CAUSE: OMOWALE ISMAEEL MAKANJU v. THE MINISTER OF CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION PLACE OF HEARING: TORONTO, ONTARIO DATE OF HEARING: APRIL 4, 2023 REASONS AND JUDGMENT: HENEGHAN J. DATED: April 6, 2023 APPEARANCES : Matthew Tubie FOR THE APPLICANT David Knapp FOR THE RESPONDENT SOLICITORS OF RECORD : Matthew Nicholas LLP Toronto, Ontario FOR THE APPLICANT Attorney General of Canada Toronto, Ontario FOR THE RESPONDENT