Osorio v MCI 2005 FCJ 1792 Generalized Risk

The Court found the claimants victims of generalized risk noting: 24 It seems to me that common sense must determine the meaning of s. 97(1)(b)(ii). To put the matter simply: if the Applicants are correct that parents in Colombia are a group facing a risk not faced generally by other individuals in Colombia, then it follows that every Colombian national who is a parent and who comes to Canada is automatically a person in need or protection. This can-not be so. 25 The risk described by the Applicants and the Board in this case is a risk faced by millions of Colombians; indeed, all Colombians who have or will have children are members of this popula-tion. It is difficult to define a broader or more general group within a nation than the group consist-ing of "parents". 26 Further, I can see nothing in s. 97(1)(b)(ii) that requires the Board to interpret "generally" as applying to all citizens. The word "generally" is commonly used to mean "prevalent" or "wide-spread". Parliament deliberately chose to include the word "generally" in s. 97(1)(b)(ii), thereby leaving to the Board the issue of deciding whether a particular group meets the definition. Provided that its conclusion is reasonable, as it is here, I see no need to intervene.