Umunyarwandakazi ari mu bahataniye ikamba ry’ubwiza muri Canada | eachamps rwanda
Airtel ad Eachamps

Umunyarwandakazi ari mu bahataniye ikamba ry’ubwiza muri Canada

Umunyarwandakazi ari mu bahataniye ikamba ry’ubwiza muri Canada

Umukobwa witwa Nancy Sibylle Uwase utuye muri Canda ari mu irushanwa ry’ubwiza ry;Abanyafurika batuye muri kiriya gihugu.

Iri rushanwa rya Miss Afrique Canada riri kuba ku nshuro ya mbere, ryitabiriwe n’abakobwa cumi n’abatanu bakomoka mu bihugu bitandukanye bya Afurika  batuye muri Canada.

Mu bakobwa bahatanye na Nancy harimo ukomoka muri Mali, Senegal, Congo Brazaville , Cȏte d’Ivoire, Cameroon, Guinée, DR Congo, Togo, Nigeria, Togo na Tanzania.

Irushanwa nyir’izina rizasozwa kuwa 23 Kamena 2018, uzegukana ikamba muri iri rushanwa azahabwa imodoka nshya n’ibindi bitarashyirwa hanze.

Miss Afrique Canada ifite insanganyamatsiko ivuga ku ‘kwigaragaza k’umurage w’Umunyafurika’ buri umwe mu bahatana ku munsi wo gutanga ikamba azajya afata umwanya yiyerekane mu mwambaro gakondo w’aho akomoka.

Nancy Sibylle Uwase uhagarariye u Rwanda  ni n’aho yavukiye gusa aza gukurira muri Canda ari n’aho atuye kugeza uyu munsi.

  Uwase Nancy Sibylle uhagarariye u Rwanda mu irushanwa rya Miss Afrique Canada

17/May/ 2018,4 months ago |

Post Your Comment

Comments(1)
BYARAMUVUNNYE RERO
Nancy Sibylle Uwase, Ange Cedrick Kayigire et Armand Loic Dereva Hirwa (demandeurs) v. Le Ministre de la Citoyenneté et de l'Immigration (défendeur) (IMM-6422-14; 2015 CF 417; 2015 FC 417) Indexed As: Dereva et al. v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) Federal Court Harrington, J. April 2, 2015. Summary: The applicants, unsuccessful refugee claimants from Rwanda, applied for a Pre-Removal Risk Assessment (PRRA). A PRRA assessment officer rejected the application on the grounds that the applicants had failed to establish their risk of persecution or torture, or of cruel and unusual treatment or punishment should they return to Rwanda. The applicants applied for judicial review, arguing that they were denied procedural fairness because the officer based his decision on evidence that was filed after the PRRA application was submitted without giving the applicants an opportunity to comment on the evidence. The Federal Court allowed the application, set aside the
Yeah 4 months ago
Dream
Sponsored Content
Loading...