Citation: 2020 RLLR 70
Tribunal: Refugee Protection Division
Date of Decision: February 19, 2020
Panel: Dominique Setton
Counsel for the Claimant(s): El-Farouk Khaki
Country: Uganda
RPD Number: TB7-23049
Associated RPD Number(s):
ATIP Number: A-2021-00800
ATIP Pages: 000069-000074
REASONS FOR DECISION
[1] These are the reasons for the decision in the claim of [XXX], who claims to be a citizen of Uganda, and is claiming refugee protection pursuant to sections 96 and 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA).[1]
[2] In rendering my reasons, I have considered and applied the Chairperson’s Guideline 4: Women Refugee Claimants Fearing Gender-Related Persecution.[2]
ALLEGATIONS
[3] You allege the following. The details of your life are contained in your Basis of Claim Form (BOC) provided in evidence.[3] You allege domestic violence by your father, and your husband. Your father forced you to marry a man who was 24 years older than you, whom you did not want to marry. The marriage occurred on [XXX] 2015. Following the marriage, you had to endure violence and mistreatment at the hands of your husband. He did not allow you to eat, or provide you with food. He raped you and was violent with you on numerous occasions, causing bodily injury, which required medical treatment.
DETERMINATION
[4] I find that you are a Convention refugee as you have established a serious possibility of persecution on account of your member of a particular social group. You are a woman who is the victim of domestic violent, both as a child and in your forced marriage.
ANALYSIS
Identity
[5] I find that your identity as a national of Uganda is established by your testimony and the supporting documentation filed, including your passport.[4]
Credibility
[6] Unless specifically noted in the analysis below, I accept your evidence about the events you encountered in Uganda as being generally credible.
[7] You have provided documents which support your allegations of domestic violence, which are contained in the evidence, such as confirmation of your birth and marriage, medical reports or records, which include photos of your injuries.[5] You also submitted letters of support from your mother, as well as a letter to you from your mother, a letter from your sister, who had been forced into marriage herself by their father, a friend of hers who helped her to escape and hide out from both her father and her husband.[6]
Objective basis of future risk
[8] You fear that if you return to your country, your husband will find you, kill you, or maim you, as he has threatened, because of your escape. In addition, you fear continued rape and violence from your husband and your father.
[9] The documentary evidence in our National Documentation Package (NDP), specifically the United Nations Development Programme’s Uganda Country Gender Assessment, corroborates your allegations:
[t]here is a disconnect between Uganda’s very positive legal framework and the lack of effective implementation or enforcement of gender-positive laws. This means that women’s legal status is precarious, their capacity as economic agents is limited, and their rights are not effectively guaranteed.[7]
[10] It also states that the country suffers from persistent high level of sexual and gender-based violence. This is also corroborated by the United States Department of State (DOS) report, which confirms that that there are three serious human rights problems in Uganda, which are respect for individual integrity, restrictions on civil liberties, and violence and discrimination against marginalized groups, such as women and children,[8] which is precisely what you have alleged in your BOC narrative and in your sworn testimony.
[11] Based on the credibility of your allegations, and the documentary evidence set out below, I find that you have established a future risk that you will be subjected to the following harm: risk of personal harm to yourself, violence, mistreatment, and death.
[12] The fact that you face this risk is corroborated by the following documents from the Board’s June 28, 2019 NDP for Uganda: the US DOS report, and the Uganda Country Gender Assessment, both noted above, as well as a recent Response to Information Request regarding forced marriages.[9]
Nature of the harm
[13] This harm clearly amounts to persecution.
State protection
[14] I find that there is clear and convincing evidence before me that the state is unable or unwilling to provide you with adequate protection. You alleged in your BOC, and provided detailed testimony regarding the efforts you made at obtaining help from the police on several occasions. You also submitted a letter, dated [XXX] 2015, showing that you went to the police to try to obtain their protection. You testified that the police told you to go home to your husband, and did not provide effective assistance. This is is corroborated by numerous additional, current articles you submitted as evidence.[10] The first article from Africa Renewal of December 20, 2107 exposes the problems that a female member of parliament has experienced in 2017 despite her rise in politics.[11] The victim and elected representative describes men who are current members of parliament who harass her, by overt physical methods and by hounding her. She is frustrated by this and says that “harassment is commonplace in Parliament”, where even there it goes unreported “because we fear the consequences.”[12] The article summarizes the efforts that Uganda has made by passing laws against violence towards women, but how violence is on the rise, despite the laws and policies. In the second report regarding the ineffectiveness of state protection which you provided in evidence, from the University of Sheffield, from April 2018, Uganda – Gender Based Violence Police Briefing, it states that:
Lifetime prevalence of GBV in Uganda is estimated at 51%… suggesting that violence against women is rampant in the country. This statistic is well above the average in Africa and worldwide, making Uganda one of the most dangerous places in the world for women.[13]
[15] Based on the analysis above, I find, on a balance of probabilities, that adequate state protection is not available to you.
Internal flight alternative
[16] I have considered whether a viable internal flight alternative exists for you in Kampala, a large city centre where you may be able to support yourself, and live independently. On the first prong of the test,[14] you have testified that your husband and your father continue to search for you. You provided an email message from your friend dated [XXX] 2019, which confirms that they are looking for you, and that your husband threatened her for any information about you.[15] In addition, your sister has advised you in email messages that two men forcefully searched your mother’s home in Kampala, looking for you, and she believes that they have been sent by your husband.[16] You have also received threatening email messages from your husband, which included one dated [XXX] 2018.[17]
[17] Your friend, [XXX] advises you not to telephone her, as her cellular phone may be tapped. On the evidence before me, I find that there is a serious possibility of persecution throughout Uganda. You alleged that your father and or husband could easily find you wherever you go in Uganda, because your cell phone’s SIM card is registered. You have provided evidence of this in the article entitled, Uganda Telecom Operators to Obtain Users Biometrics and Photos which confirms that the National Identity Registration Authority (NIRA) requires that cell phones be registered for security reasons.[18] The result is that the service operators have all biometric and personal information. You fear that you could easily be tracked because of this, as these service providers are also not secure as the information that they have has been breached. This article states that other Ugandans who had had their phones hacked sought help from the Uganda Communication Commission (UCC), but the UCC were unable to assist the victims due to a lack of “technical capacity to prevent data breaches.”[19] The article confirms that there is continued exposure of the public to data breaches, obtained illegally. As a result, I find that your father or your husband could access the information, and track you through your cellular phone wherever you attempt to go, in Uganda, including Kampala.
CONCLUSION
[18] Based on the analysis above, I conclude that you are a Convention refugee. Accordingly, I accept your claim.
[1] The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c.27, as amended, sections 96 and 97(1).
[2] Guideline 4: Women Refugee Claimants Fearing Gender-Related Persecution: Update, Guideline Issued by the Chairperson Pursuant to Section 65(3) of the Immigration Act, IRB, Ottawa, November 25, 1996, as continued in effect by the Chairperson on June 28, 2002, under the authority found in section 159(1)(h) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
[3] Exhibit 2, Basis of Claim Form (BOC).
[4] Exhibit 1, Package of lnformation from the Referring CBSA/CIC, Certified True Copy of Passport.
[5] Exhibit 7, Personal Disclosure received December 6, 2019, at pp. 1-2, 8-10, and 34-35.
[6] Ibid., at pp. 37-48.
[7] Exhibit 3, National Documentation Package (NDP) for Uganda (June 28, 2019), item 5.5.
[8] Ibid., item 2.1.
[9] Ibid., item 2.1, and 5.5-5.6.
[10] Exhibit 8, Country Conditions # 1, at pp. 1-6 and 13-16.
[11] Ibid., at pp. 1-6.
[12] Ibid., at p. 1.
[13] Ibid., at p. 14.
[14] Rasaratnam, Sivaganthan v. ME.I. (F.C.A., no. A-232-91), Mahoney, Stone, Linden, December 5, 1991. Reported: Rasaratnam v. Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1992] 1 F.C. 706 (C.A.).
[15] Exhibit 7, Personal Disclosure received December 6, 2019, at pp. p. 56.
[16] Ibid., at pp. 30-33.
[17] Ibid., at p. 21.
[18] Exhibit 10, Country Conditions #2, at p. 3.
[19] Ibid., at p. 3.