Citation: 2019 RLLR 94
Tribunal: Refugee Protection Division
Date of Decision: March 1, 2019
Panel: J. Kushner
Counsel for the claimant(s): Mohamed Mahdi
RPD Number: TB8-03742
ATIP Number: A-2020-01459
ATIP Pages: 000080-000083
REASONS FOR DECISION
 [XXX] claims to be a citizen of Yemen and is seeking refugee protection pursuant to sections 96 and 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.1
 The claimant’s allegations are set out in his Basis of Claim form as amended and were expanded upon in testimony.2 To summarize, the claimant fears that he will be harmed or killed by Houthis because of his real and imputed anti-Houthi political opinion. The claimant’s brother has engaged in anti-Houthi journalism despite the Houthis charging the claimant with ensuring that his brother supports the Houthis.
 The panel finds that the claimant has established that he faces a serious possibility of persecution in Yemen.
 The claimant’s personal and national identity as a citizen of Yemen has been established on a balance of probabilities based on his testimony and a copy of his Yemeni passport.3
 On a balance of probabilities the panel accepts as credible the claimant’s testimony regarding the central allegations in this claim. The claimant provided supporting documents for some of these allegations. The claimant’s testimony was generally consistent with the documentary evidence. The claimant provided evidence regarding his most recent trip to Yemen when his brother was detained and abused by Houthis, when the claimant was ordered to ensure his brother supported the Houthis in future, and when the claimant and his brother separately fled the country. The claimant has provided corroborating evidence including letters from his wife who remains in hiding in Yemen4 and from his brother who fled to Egypt.5 The claimant’s documentary evidence supports his allegations regarding his brother’s [XXX] work criticizing Houthis, supports the claimant’s brother’s detention and mistreatment by Houthis, and supports the claimant’s forced pledge to the Houthis to ensure that his brother supported the Houthis. The claimant also provided evidence of his brother’s [XXX].6
 The claimant has lived in Saudi Arabia as a temporary resident for approximately 25 years though he currently has no immigration status there and has never had any permanent status there. Over the last several years the claimant has travelled to Yemen on multiple occasions. The claimant’s explanation for making repeated trips to Yemen while it was in a state of civil war is that he was on vacation, he wanted to see his family, and he did not go out often. After being targeted by the Houthis on his last trip to Yemen, the claimant later travelled to the United States of America (USA), though he did not seek asylum there. The claimant explained that Muslims are suffering under the administration of the current USA president. The claimant’s explanations do not completely mitigate the panel’s concerns regarding the lack of subjective fear evidenced by repeatedly returning to a situation where the claimant was at risk, and of not seeking asylum when he had the opportunity to do so. However, the panel finds that in the claimant’s particular circumstances the concern that remains is not determinative.
 The country conditions documents provided by the claimant,7 along with the objective evidence in the National Documentation Package (NDP),8 set out the situation in Yemen in detail. The documents are generally consistent regarding the risk faced by those who are critical of the Houthis or who are seen as having a political opinion that is against the Houthis. The Houthis control a large portion of Yemen, including the area where the claimant’s family was living. The claimant is seen as the head of a family who has repeatedly and publicly spoken out against the Houthis.9 The claimant’s family includes a journalist who has been detained, tortured, and threatened, by Houthis. The documentary evidence contains numerous reports of the Houthis engaging in violence, human rights violations, arbitrary detentions, and torture.
 The objective evidence is clear that Yemen is currently dealing with a widespread armed violent conflict. It involves multiple factions including Houthi rebels, Saudi-led or Saudisupported armed forces, as well as various extremist factions in Yemen including reports of AlQaeda being active in many parts of the country. There is no single central government in Yemen. The situation in the country has been described as a civil war. The evidence before the panel gives no indication that the conflict will be ending in the near future. There are reports of an increasing number of civilians being seriously affected by the ongoing conflict, including being displaced, harmed, or killed. When considering the widespread and ongoing nature of the conflict in Yemen, the panel finds that the current security situation in the country is such that there is no access to state protection nor is there a viable internal flight alternative in the claimant’s particular circumstances.
 Having considered all of the available evidence the panel finds that the claimant faces a serious possibility of persecution in Yemen. The panel concludes that the claimant is a Convention refugee. The panel therefore accepts the claim.
(signed) J. Kushner
March 1, 2019
1 Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27, as amended.
2 Exhibit 2 and exhibit 12, item 1.
3 Exhibit 1.
4 Exhibit 7, item 1.
5 Exhibit 6, item 4.
6 Exhibit 6, item 7.
7 Exhibits 8-11.
8 Exhibit 3, National Documentation Package (NDP) for Yemen (31 October 2018).
9 Exhibit 7, item 2.