Citation: 2019 RLLR 213
Tribunal: Refugee Protection Division
Date of Decision: February 22, 2019
Panel: Kerry Cundal
Counsel for the Claimant(s): Bassam Azzi
Country: Egypt
RPD Number: VB8-06489
Associated RPD Number(s): VB8-06490, VB8-06491, VB8-06492, VB8-06493
ATIP Number: A-2020-00518
ATIP Pages: 003711-003714
REASONS FOR DECISION
[1] This is the decision of the Refugee Protection Division (RPD) in the claim ofXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and the joined claimantsXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXand XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, citizens of Egypt who are claiming refugee protection pursuant to section 96 and subsection 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (the “Act“).1 The claimants’ identities have been established by copies of their passports.2
ALLEGATIONS
[2] The claimants fear return to Egypt because they fear persecution because of their Nubian ethnicity and they have been targets of a feud in which the principal claimant’s brother was killed. The claimants left Egypt and had temporary status in Kuwait because of their work. The principal claimant has been detained and questioned by police due to his ethnicity and dark skin colour. Further details are highlighted in their Basis of Claim (BOC) forms.3 The claimants arrived in Canada on XXXX XXXX XXXX 2018. The claimants signed the BOCs on XXXX XXXX XXXX 2018.4
Well-Founded Fear of Persecution and Risk of Harm
[3] The claimants provided a detailed narrative and documents supporting the persecution of their family including employment records, police report, death certificates of family members and articles regarding the persecution and marginalization of Nubians in Egypt.5 The objective evidence supports the claimants’ fear of ethnic persecution in Egypt and indicates that the Nubian people in Egypt are an ancient people who live along the border between Sudan and Egypt and they have their own distinct language, customs and culture.6 The Nubian people have been marginalized politically, socially and economically in Egypt.7 There have been deadly clashes between Arab and Nubian tribes and the state has not taken adequate measures to protect Nubians or settle these conflicts.8 Nubians have protested to address the harassment, discrimination and displacement they face in Egypt and have been arrested by Egyptian authorities as a result of the protests.9 The state classified some of the Nubian lands as military zones in 2014 further displacing the Nubians in Egypt.10
[4] The objective evidence indicates that Egypt’s authoritarian regime is instituting wide- scale repression and punitive litigation “under the auspices of its many new laws to surveil and stifle individual voices of dissent in civil society;” the authoritarian regime has acted methodically targeting those voicing dissent against the government including detentions and extrajudicial killings.11
[5] The panel finds that the claimants have established a nexus to race/ethnicity. Based on the totality of the evidence, the panel finds that the claimants would face more than a mere possibility of persecution if they return to Egypt.
State Protection and Internal Flight Alternative
[6] The objective evidence indicates the following regarding state protection in Egypt:
The government inconsistently punished or prosecuted officials who committed abuses, whether in the security services or elsewhere in government. In most cases the government did not comprehensively investigate human rights abuses, including most incidents of violence by security forces, contributing to an environment of impunity.12
[7] The general security context in Egypt is uncertain at this time:
President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, who first took power in a July 2013 coup, continues to govern Egypt in an authoritarian manner, though the election of a new parliament in late 2015 ended a period of rule by executive decree. Serious political opposition is virtually nonexistent, as both liberal and Islamist activists face criminal prosecution and imprisonment. Terrorism persists unabated in the Sinai Peninsula and has also struck the Egyptian mainland, despite the government’s use of aggressive and often abusive tactics to combat it.13
[8] Further evidence provides a general overview of the fragility of the current regime and lack of operationally effective state protection in Egypt:
In the first several months of 2017, Egypt has witnessed a number of events that have challenged the country’s stability and security, economic development, and the rights and freedoms of its citizens. The Egyptian government has continued its repression of public space, even going so far as to physically close the offices of the El Nadeem Center for Rehabilitation of Victims of Violence and Torture in early February. The country is no more stable, with terror groups and the Egyptian state engaged in a war of propaganda narratives.14
[9] Based on the totality of the evidence, the panel finds that there is no operationally effective state protection available to Nubians who face death threats due to feuds in Egypt from a state that has been complicit in their displacement and marginalization. Further, given the harassment and discrimination of Nubians due to their dark skin colour throughout Egypt, the panel finds that it is not objectively reasonable in their particular circumstances to relocate in Egypt as they would face the same difficulties and harassment throughout Egypt.
CONCLUSION
[10] For the foregoing reasons, the panel determines that the claimants are Convention refugees under section 96 of the Act. The Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada therefore accepts their claims.
(signed) Kerry Cundal
February 22, 2019
1 Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27.
2 Exhibit 1.
3 Exhibits 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5.
4 Exhibits 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5.
5 Exhibits 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5 and 4.
6 Exhibit 4, pp. 76-97.
7 Exhibit 4, pp. 76-97.
8 Exhibit 3, National Documentation Package (NDP), June 29, 2018, Item 13.1.
9 Exhibit 3, NDP, Item 2.1.
10 Exhibit 3, NDP, Item 2.2.
11 Exhibit 3, NDP, Item 4.8.
12 Exhibit 3, NDP, Item 2.1.
13 Exhibit 3, NDP, Item 2.4.
14 Exhibit 3, NDP, Item 2.5.