A refugee claimant was targeted for extinction by a criminal group linked to the government. After refusing to pay, they were threatened with death. The group specifically targets individuals perceived as government opponents. The hearing was postponed for 6 months. During this period, the client created new evidence to be included. The RCIC advised against it. The client insisted and threatened to file a complaint if the RCIC didn't comply.

Continuing with representation is not advisable given the client's insistence on pursuing actions contrary to the RCIC's professional advice. This situation undermines the trust necessary for effective representation and could lead to further complications or ethical dilemmas for the RCIC.

While informing the Refugee Protection Division (RPD) about the incident may seem appropriate, it does not address the immediate concern of the deteriorating relationship between the RCIC and the client. The RCIC's primary obligation is to the client, and if representation cannot proceed effectively, informing the RPD would not resolve the underlying issue.

Communicating the incident to the College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants is a step that may be taken if there are ethical concerns, but it is not the immediate action needed in this case. The RCIC must first ensure that they are no longer representing the client if the relationship has irreparably broken down.