Citation: 2019 RLLR 102
Tribunal: Refugee Protection Division
Date of Decision: January 7, 2019
Panel: S. Charow
Counsel for the Claimant(s): Denis Onek Olwedo
Country: Uganda
RPD Number: TB8-08518
ATIP Number: A-2020-01459
ATIP Pages: 000139-000144
DECISION
[1] MEMBER: This is the decision for [XXX], File TB8-08518. I have considered your testimony and the other evidence in this case and I am ready to render my decision orally. I would also add that I have also considered the guidelines relating to gender.
[2] You are claiming to be a citizen of Uganda and are claiming refugee protection pursuant to Section 96 and 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
[3] I find that you are a Convention refugee for the following reasons.
[4] The allegations of your claim can be found in your Basis of Claim Form at Exhibit 2 and the subsequent amendment at Exhibit 6.
[5] In short, you alleged persecution as a member of a particular social group, namely that you are in danger of being harmed because of your gender as you have suffered domestic violence at the hands of your husband since about 2011.
[6] You fear that your husband would harm you or kill you should you return to Uganda and that the police cannot protect you.
[7] You believe that your husband could locate you anywhere in Uganda as he has influence over the police and people in the army due to his position with an AIDS organisation in Entebbe.
[8] You allege that he became friends with high-ranking AIDS patients he counselled and did favours for them, causing them to owe him favours as well as any favours that they may do for him because of their friendship.
[9] Your personal identity as a citizen of Uganda has been established by your testimony and the supporting document filed in Exhibit 1, namely your Ugandan passport. I find that on a balance of probabilities identity and country of reference have been established.
[10] In terms of your general credibility, I found you to be a fairly credible witness. I therefore accept what you have alleged in your oral testimony and in your Basis of Claim Form.
[11] I did find that there were some issues with your testimony. You testified that these high-ranking officials from the police or the military had come to your home; however, this information was not contained in your Basis of Claim Form.
[12] When I put that omission to you, you said that you were trying to narrow down the story and that you want to file amendments, but you didn’t have enough time to file an amendment to your Basis of Claim Form.
[13] I also noticed that you had described fleeing to your mother’s home, and that when your husband came to take you back to Entebbe, he came with men from the army. The fact that he brought army men with him was not included in your Basis of Claim Form.
[14] When I put that omission to you, you said as you mentioned before you had wanted to put it in your amendment, that you knew you had left out important information, but were trying to narrow down the story.
[15] When I am considering your explanations for these omissions, I do note that you are well educated, you have a university degree, and that you had the benefit of counsel both at the hearing but also when completing your Basis of Claim Form.
[16] Additionally, I note that you actually have submitted an addendum to your Basis of Claim Form at Exhibit 6.
[17] So, with these factors considered together, I find that the answers that you gave for these omissions have not adequately explained the identified omissions, and I make that finding even when considering your diagnosis of stressor-related disorder. I reference Exhibit 5, page 28.
[18] As such, I do draw a negative inference about your credibility from each omission. However, I find that the other credible evidence including other lines of testimony and your supporting documentation outweighs the concerns I have that stem out of these omissions.
[19] I find that when you were discussing the abuse that you had suffered, you were very credible. You described in detail the abuse you suffered at the hands of your husband over the course of your marriage. You also provided extensive documentation to support your claim.
[20] I note the existence of identity documents and medical documentation for your children, which does show the name of your husband as their father. I am satisfied therefore that you had a relationship with this man.
[21] I also note affidavits from your mother and from your aunt and from your landlady, and these people talked about what they personally witnessed and how they personally helped you, and these affidavits are consistent with your allegations, they are detailed and they speak to each of the individual experience in regards to your allegations.
[22] I also see a support letter from your sister, which again is consistent and detailed. I see a letter from your divorce attorney where you had described trying to get a legal divorce in Uganda so that maybe your husband will stop bothering your family.
[23] As well, I see a police report from Kampala, and although I did have some concerns because they said that they are looking for your husband, you said today that the police are not helping at all, you explained that even if nothing is being done by the police, they would still say that the investigation is ongoing, and that is indeed consistent with other evidence that we have in the National Documentation Package at Exhibit 3, which talks about the general lack of effectiveness of the Ugandan police, specifically when it comes to domestic violence issues, as I will discuss in a bit.
[24] I also note an affidavit from your uncle and a letter from your father, again consistent, detailed and specific to what they personally witnessed or experienced.
[25] When considering all of that and your credible testimony, I am satisfied that the events have occurred as alleged, that you would face persecution at the hands of your husband or his friends in the military or police should you return to Uganda. I find that you have established your subjective fear.
[26] I find that there is a link between what you fear and one of the five Convention grounds, specifically as a Ugandan woman who is at risk of domestic violence, you are a member of a particular social group because of your gender.
[27] Therefore, your claim has been assessed under Section 96 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
[28] I further find that you have an objective basis for your fear because of the documented conditions for Uganda as found in the National Documentation Package at Exhibit 3.
[29] I note Item 2.1 which states that gender-based violence was common. It was recorded that in 2016, there were 163 deaths of women due to domestic violence, which was almost a 50% increase over 6 years.
[30] I also note Item 5.5, which states that 56% of women aged 15 through 49 had experienced physical violence at least once since age 15. One of the factors behind these high prevalence rates is the widespread cultural acceptance of such violence.
[31] The same survey found that wife battering is widely accepted, with 58% of women and 44% of men believing that it’s justified for a man to beat his wife for specified reasons.
[32] When considering this, I find that your subjective fear has an objective basis. I find that you have a well-founded fear of persecution due to your gender.
[33] I find that State protection would not be reasonably forthcoming in this case as per the evidence already discussed.
[34] I also note that in Item 5.2 of the National Documentation Package at Exhibit 3, they talk about reasons why only a small percentage of victims of violence go to the police, and some of those reasons include apathetic attitudes among police officers towards domestic violence as well as the high cost associated with accessing police services and the desire by victims to keep families together.
[35] The same study also notes that gender-based violence is perceived as a private matter and that legal redress could compromise the livelihood of the victims.
[36] The same report also notes that gaps still exists in terms of State protection due to a lack of professionalism of law enforcement organisations, especially the police.
[37] In terms of an internal flight alternative, you have alleged that your husband has friends that are high-ranking officials in both the army and the military.
[38] You alleged that he developed these friendships because he was these people’s AIDS counsellor and would do them favours by ensuring that they could pick up their medication from your home instead of risking the stigma of members of the public finding out their AIDS status.
[39] You testified that you saw them come to your home on multiple occasions to pick up their medication and that you also saw them as the years progressed become friends with your husband as they would stay and have drinks.
[40] The fact that he has access to people in the military or the police is supported by the documents that you filed.
[41] Various family members and your landlady in their affidavits or letter stated that men in uniforms would come and enquire about you on your husband’s behalf. These people also affirmed or wrote that they had been harassed and arrested by members of the police. I refer to Exhibits 5 and 7.
[42] You have also alleged that should you relocate within Uganda, you would have to register with the local council, which is consistent with the documentary evidence in the National Documentation Package at Exhibit 3. On this matter, I find both your testimony and your written evidence to be credible.
[43] Accordingly, when considering the mandatory registration upon relocation, in combination with the established police and military connections of your agent of persecution, your husband, I find that on a balance of probabilities there is more than a mere possibility of persecution for you anywhere in Uganda as there is more than a mere possibility that your husband could find you if you had relocated or would relocate in the future and that he has been making ongoing efforts to find you.
[44] As the test for an internal flight alternative fails on the first prong, I find that there is no reasonable internal flight alternative for you anywhere in Uganda.
[45] Based on the totality of the evidence, I find the claimant to be a Convention refugee. Your claim is therefore accepted.
[46] So, this will conclude today’s hearing. I would like to thank everyone for their participation.
[47] Thank you, madam interpreter.
[48] INTERPRETER: Welcome.
[49] MEMBER: Thank you, counsel.
[50] COUNSEL: Thank you, madam member.
[51] MEMBER: Thank you, ma’ am.
[52] CLAIMANT: Thank you, ma’ am.
———- REASONS CONCLUDED ———-