Citation: 2022 RLLR 39
Tribunal: Refugee Protection Division
Date of Decision: October 17, 2022
Panel: Alexandra Kotyk
Counsel for the Claimant(s): Jeffrey Nadler
Country: Pakistan
RPD Number: TC2-21802
Associated RPD Number(s): TC2-21803, TC2-21804, TC2-21805, TC2-21806
ATIP Number: A-2022-01960
ATIP Pages: N/A
DECISION
[1] MEMBER: So, this is the decision for the following claimants, TC2-21802, XXXX XXXX, TC2-21803, XXXX XXXX XXXX, TC2-21804, XXXX XXXX, TC2-21805, XXXX XXXX, and TC2-21806, XXXX XXXX. You are claiming to be citizens of Pakistan and are seeking refugee protection pursuant to section 96 and 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. I have considered your testimony and the other evidence in this case, and I am ready to render my decision orally. Designated representative at the time of this hearing, the claimants XXXX, XXXX, and XXXX were minors. The principal claimant, XXXX, is their father, and so served as the designated representative and confirmed his role at the start of this hearing.
DETERMINATION
[2] I find that all claimants are Convention refugees on the section 96 nexus grounds of religion, and for the associate minor claimants, as membership in a particular social group as family members of the principal claimant for the following reasons.
ALLEGATIONS
[3] The allegations are set out in the Basis of Claim forms found at Exhibits 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5, and the amendment at Exhibit 5. In summary, the principal claimant’s family has been targeted by the LHA and SSP since his brother made an agreement with the Shia community to use his land. The principal claimant himself was directly targeted after statements he made to a religious leader while he was working in Kuwait, and this led to a fatwa and police report alleging blasphemy being issued against him.
[4] (inaudible) in the US, the principal claimant testified that the family entered the US on XXXX XXXX, 2020, but did not make refugee claims, as they planned to join his brother at the time who was already in Canada. I accept this explanation and draw no negative conclusion from it, as it relates to the claimant’s subjective fear.
Identity
[5] Your country of reference and identities as nationals of Pakistan has been established on a balance of probabilities by your testimony and a copy of passports found at Exhibit 1.
Credibility
[6] The principal claimant, XXXX, provided the majority of the testimony for the hearing as the person who was most directly impacted by the events. I found him to be a credible witness. I noted no omissions or inconsistencies between his oral testimony and the Basis of Claim form and amendment. He was spontaneous and detailed in the answers asked and internally consistent, even when we had one (1) date that was momentarily incorrect, he was quickly able to clarify that date to the satisfaction of myself.
[7] The principal claimant testified to the origin of the problems with — starting with targeting of his family in 2016, as his brother, XXXX (ph), made an agreement with the Shias in the community to use his land. This led to the brother being targeted by the SSP and LHA, and during an altercation with these people on XXXX XXXX, 2016, his cousin was killed. The principal claimant testified that he himself began to be targeted starting on XXXX XXXX, 2020, when he was at a gathering, which included a religious leader from his hometown. This maulvi was attempting to solicit donations, and when the principal claimant questioned the work that they were doing in the community with this money, he said it was to train people as soldiers to bring back the real spirit of Islam to Pakistan and made negative statements against other religions. When the principal claimant pushed back against these statements and questioned who was behind the plans, this maulvi said that the notable people were two (2) other maulvis in the community, XXXX (ph) and XXXX (ph). And when he mentioned these names, the principal claimant remembered that these were the people who had been behind the issues with his brother and leading to the death of his cousin. And he mentioned this to the people at the gathering. The maulvi who was there said that then when he returned to Pakistan he would tell the community — religious community about this and that they would decide the principal claimant’s fate.
[8] On XXXX XXXX, 2021, a fatwa was issued against the principal claimant, which was seen in both his hometown and other cities, including Lahore by a family friend. As well, the religious members went to the police and made a false accusation of blasphemy, which will be — this led to a copy of an application being issued by the police, and to the police and members of the LHA and SSP both looking for the principal claimant at his family home as recently as XXXX of this year.
[9] In support of his testimony, the claimants have provided Exhibits 5, copies of affidavits from the brother in Canada who himself has made a positive refugee claim and been accepted, including his RPD notice at the same exhibit, an affidavit from a brother still in Pakistan who explained what has occurred and why he himself has not been targeted while his brothers have been, a copy of the cousin’s death certificate, a copy of the application to the police, and a copy of the fatwa. I give full weight to these documents as they support the events as alleged, and I have no reason to doubt their genuineness. I find that the claimant’s subjective fear is established by the credible testimony, and I believe what they have alleged on a balance of probabilities.
[10] I also find that there is an objective basis for what they fear in Pakistan. The National Documentation Package for Pakistan provides objective evidence in various places, but specifically 1.8, which talks about extremist Sunni groups, such as the LHA and SSP, which view Shias as heretics, infidels, and apostates who should be punished by death. Although the claimants themselves are Sunni Muslims, they are being targeted as they are seen to support Shias, which has also led to targeting by these groups. The LHA continue to operate across Pakistan, despite government and military operations attempting to disrupt their activities. Item 7.12 of the NDP says that the LHA has a reputation for being one (1) of the most violent Islamic extremist organizations in Pakistan, with links to Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. And since 2003, it has been on the list of terrorist organizations produced by the Canadian government.
[11] Therefore, based on this documentary evidence, I find that the claimants all have an objectively well-founded fear of persecution due to their views as someone – views by the extremist groups as people who support Shias, and specifically for the associate and minor claimants, as family members of the principal claimant who has himself been accused of blasphemy and had a fatwa issued against him.
State Protection
[12] I find that state protection would not be available to any of the claimants should they seek it in Pakistan.
[13] Information in the National Documentation Package at Items 1.13 and 10.4 confirm that the police force in Pakistan is inept due to operational deficiencies and external influences. Information at Item 1.8 establishes that these extremist organizations have ties to corrupt elements and law enforcement providing them with reach throughout Pakistan, which would likely enable them to locate the family.
[14] Considering the objective country documentation, as well as their personal circumstances, I find that the claimants have all rebutted the presumption of state protection, and adequate state protection would not be available to them in Pakistan.
Internal Flight Alternative
[15] I have also considered whether there was a viable internal flight alternative for them in Pakistan. Item 7.9 and 7.10 of the National Documentation Package discuss how the police and government in Pakistan work together with extremist organizations. And Item 9.12 show the police depend on fatwa’s when applying blasphemy charges, which has likely occurred in this case. Additionally, the principal claimant has credibly testified to the fatwa that was issued being seen across Pakistan, indicating that he would be sought in other parts of the country.
[16] Based on the testimony and the claimants’ specific circumstances, I find that on a balance of probabilities all claimants’ lives would be at risk throughout Pakistan, and they do not have a viable internal flight alternative.
CONCLUSION
[17] Based on the totality of the evidence, I find that all claimants have established a serious possibility of persecution on the nexus ground of religion, and for the associate and minor claimants, as membership in a particular social group as family members of the principal claimant. I find you all to be Convention refugees, and I accept your claims.
——— REASONS CONCLUDED ———