Cheryl Robinson and Bujar Huruglica

Bujar Huruglica: Refugee advocates, who say crucial facts of life-and-death cases are sometimes overlooked in the initial decision, want the tribunal to undertake a full review of all the evidence to decide whether a refugee judge has ruled correctly in rejecting an asylum claim. But Ottawa says rehearing a claim from scratch is inefficient and would reduce the lower adjudicators job to that of a preliminary inquiry, according to The Star. A real appeal should be a full fact-based appeal, where you get a second set of eyes at the evidence a second kick at the can, said Cheryl Robinson, lawyer for Bujar Huruglica and his family, who are challenging RADs rejection of their case and its rationale and Canadas refugee appeal tribunal, now more than a year old, offers no real appeal to failed refugee claimants and just duplicates functions already performed by the federal court, critics say. Those arguments are at the core of a current case involving a family from Kosovo whose refugee application was denied the first of its kind to be heard by the federal court. The case could potentially reopen hundreds of asylum appeals the Refuge Appeal Division RAD has dismissed since its inception in December 2012. (www.immigrantscanada.com). As reported in the news.