Citation: 2020 RLLR 184
Tribunal: Refugee Protection Division
Date of Decision: March 23, 2020
Panel: Jeffrey Brian Gullickson
Counsel for the Claimant(s): Bilal Hamideh
Country: Egypt
RPD Number: MB9-17860
Associated RPD Number(s): MB9-17939, MB9-17940, MB9-17941, MB9-17942, MB9-17943
ATIP Number: A-2020-00518
ATIP Pages: 002329-002333
REASONS FOR DECISION
INTRODUCTION
[1] The principal claimant, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, her son, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXand other children, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXand XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX are claiming refugee protection pursuant to sections 96 and 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Their submitted passports prove their identity and that they are citizens of Egypt.
[2] I have appointed XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX as designated representative for the minor children XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXXandXXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX.
[3] In rendering my reasons, I have considered and applied the Chairperson’s Guidelines on Women Refugee Claimants Fearing Gender-Related Persecution.
ALLEGATIONS
[4] The principal claimant’s father was arrested for seven months for being a member of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) in Egypt in the 1980’s and was subsequently threatened with arrest for his political opposition in Egypt. He moved the family to Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) in 1991.
[5] The principal claimant married and had children in KSA with an Egyptian husband who has temporary status in KSA. She returned to Egypt in 2012 for a one-month visit. She supported President Morsi who was later removed from power in a military coup in 2013. She continued to support the Muslim Brotherhood and oppose the government in Egypt.
[6] After the military coup in Egypt in 2013, the government violently repressed political opposition.
[7] In 2017, the Egyptian authorities came to her family’s home looking for her for security reasons. She feared returning to Egypt.
[8] In 2018, her uncle was arrested in Egypt by security forces on a charge of membership in the MB. Friends of the family were arrested on similar charges.
[9] KSA is an ally of the current Egyptian government and threatened MB supporters in KSA.
[10] The principal claimant feared that she and her children would be removed from KSA to Egypt. She obtained US visas to travel to the US then Canada to make a refugee claim.
DETERMINATION
[11] The claimants are Convention refugees. They established a serious possibility of persecution on grounds of imputed political opinion or for membership in a particular social group (members of the family of the principal claimant).
ANALYSIS
Credibility
[12] Credibility concerns were not determinative.
[13] The claimants submitted probative evidence in support of their claims.
[14] The claimants submitted probative evidence in support of the main elements of their claims, for example, of the principal claimant’s political activities on social media (P-4) and her father’s arbitrary arrest in 1981 in relation to the MB and that the court granted him damages in 1992 (P-3).
[15] The National Documentation Package (NDP) for Egypt, dated September 30, 2019, shows the repression of the former ruling party, the Freedom and Justice Party and the Muslim Brotherhood, which is now an outlawed organisation in Egypt, and that there has been severe repression of persons associated with the Muslim Brotherhood or a similar political opposition to the government, such as protesters and critics of the government (NDP, Tab 4.5).
[16] Critics of the Egyptian government face severe treatment under recent and renewed state of emergency or counterterrorism laws (NDP, Tabs 2.1 and 2.6).
[17] Since the military coup in 2013, university students and staff have faced government suspension, dismissal and sometimes violent treatment due to the perceived or real affiliation with the Muslim Brotherhood or the former government under Morsi (NDP, Tabs 2.5 and 2.6).
[18] The Egyptian authorities have been involved in hundreds of extra-judicial killings, and have detained or imprisoned an estimated 60,000 persons in the period of 2013 to 2016 (NDP, Tab 4.8, page 27) and that some of those victims have been males as young as 14 (NDP, Tab 4.5). Family members of persons targeted by the government have also been arrested (NDP, Tab 2.8, pages 9-10). The NDP shows that children as young as 5 and 7 had been arrested by Egyptian authorities (NDP, tab 2.1) but that reference was regarding the mother arrested and it has not been shown that the children had actually been arrested and not simply taken into custody with the mother since there was not a caregiver at the time with whom the children could have been left.
[19] While the objective evidence shows that it is unlikely that the child claimants would be arrested upon return to Egypt, given that family members of political opponents face harassment and discrimination in Egypt, the children may face discrimination amounting to persecution due to their family relation to the principal claimant.
[20] The military courts are currently used in Egypt and are expanding in use where defendants have fewer rights than in civilian courts – these military courts are being used against people who are protesting against the post-coup government in Egypt (NDP, Tab 1.5, pages 29- 30).
State protection and Internal flight alternative (IFA)
[21] There is clear and convincing evidence before me that the state is unable or unwilling to provide the claimants with adequate protection, for the reasons stated above.
[22] On the evidence before me, I find that there is a serious possibility of persecution throughout Egypt for the claimants in their circumstances.
CONCLUSION
[23] The claimants are Convention refugees.
[24] I accept their claims.
(signed) JEFFREY BRIAN GULLICKSON
March 23, 2020