Tatarski v MCI 2010 FC 660 State Protection No need to go to other office when there is no evidence it will protect

The Court set aside a decision based on state protection noting: 13 The documentary evidence relied upon by the Board does not explain in what way the prosecutor's office would have provided protection to the Applicant, it does not seem that the purpose of this office is to provide protection from crime, nor does it comment on the effectiveness of taking one's case to this office (Canada, Immigration and Refugee Board, Recourse available to those with a complaint of police inaction in response to crimes, harassment or discrimination; organizations that would be of assistance in such cases (January 2003 - August 2005) (2 September 2005)). It does however state that Roma are more often victims of police inaction than other groups. This same documentary evidence states that information on the response of the ombudsman's office to police inaction could not be found among the sources consulted and in an interview, the director of an organization for the protection of human rights in Bulgaria, indicated that in his view, the ombudsman had no real authority and can only make recommendations.