I know because I read the OP. Obviously you didn't.
... Mr. Tindungan argued before the Refugee Board that he faces differential punishment in the US because he has spoken out publicly against US military actions in Iraq and Afghanistan. He also argued that he would not get a fair trial if returned because the US court-martial system is not an independent and impartial tribunal as required under Canadian and International law. .
After reviewing Tindungan's case, the Federal Court found that Tindungan "submitted voluminous documentary evidence from credible, third-party sources … that suggest that the US has not complied with its international obligations." However, the Refugee Board improperly ignored this evidence.
The Court further found that the US court-martial system "fails to comply with basic fairness requirements found in Canadian and International Law", therefore impacting whether Tindungan would receive a fair hearing if returned to the US.
... Mr. Tindungan argued before the Refugee Board that he faces differential punishment in the US because he has spoken out publicly against US military actions in Iraq and Afghanistan. He also argued that he would not get a fair trial if returned because the US court-martial system is not an independent and impartial tribunal as required under Canadian and International law. .
After reviewing Tindungan's case, the Federal Court found that Tindungan "submitted voluminous documentary evidence from credible, third-party sources … that suggest that the US has not complied with its international obligations." However, the Refugee Board improperly ignored this evidence.
The Court further found that the US court-martial system "fails to comply with basic fairness requirements found in Canadian and International Law", therefore impacting whether Tindungan would receive a fair hearing if returned to the US.