Citation: 2021 RLLR 78
Tribunal: Refugee Protection Division
Date of Decision: March 10, 2021
Panel: A. Green
Counsel for the Claimant(s): Matthew Moyal
RPD Number: TB9-28949
Associated RPD Number(s): N/A
ATIP Number: A-2022-01778
ATIP Pages: N/A
 MEMBER: I have considered the evidence before me and I am now ready to render a decision orally. The claimant XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX seeks refugee protection pursuant to Sections 96 and 97.1 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
 The allegations on which the claimant relies can be found in his Basis of Claim form, Exhibit 2. I will not repeat all of the allegations here however the claimant is a 21-year-old man who was born in Iran on XXXX XXXX 2000. During his third year of high school the claimant met a girl of the Baha’i faith with whom he became friends. The claimant later learned that this girl had problems within her family, specifically her mother was deceased and her father was in prison and that she faced eviction because of her Baha’i faith. The claimant spoke to their local (inaudible) trying to find a resolution however he was accused of being impure and told that his relationship with this individual would cause problems for him.
 The claimant subsequently spoke to his father who gave him permission for the girl to move into the family’s home in the basement or cellar. This caused immense problems for the claimant and his father. Amongst those problems his father was taken and arrested in 2018. The claimant was also taken and interrogated on more than one occasion. Both the claimant and his father received bail however they continued to have problems.
 On XXXX XXXX 2018, the claimant traveled to Canada for studies but his family continued to have problems in Iran. After returning to Iran to support his father during his court case, the claimant was again taken by the intelligence service. He was interrogated and physically assaulted. He was asked about his time in Canada, his association with Baha’i and accused of spying. The claimant like his father was subsequently charged by the authorities with supporting and collaborating with the Baha’i cult with a view to promoting non-Islamic religion in the Islamic republic of Iran.
 The claimant subsequently fled to Canada again on XXXX XXXX 2019 and since his return to Canada he has received a 20-year sentence in (inaudible). His father’s case is ongoing due to delays in that court case.
 On the basis of your imputed political opinion I find that you face a serious possibility of persecution for a Convention ground pursuant to Section 96 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. In terms of your identity I find that you are a national of Iran. This is established by your sworn testimony and the identity documents on file, in particular your passport.
 I found the claimant to be a credible witness. His claim is well supported by numerous documents including the bail documents for him and his father, the summons for him and his father, the court order that he received with the 20-year sentence, and the letter from the lawyer who represented the claimant and his father in Iran. I have no reason to doubt the genuineness or trustworthiness of these documents. I find that the claimant has a subjective fear. He returned to Canada immediately after realizing that his life was at risk in Iran.
 In terms of the objective basis for the claimant’s fear, item 2.1 of the National Documentation Package for Iran, Exhibit 3, indicates that the governments human rights record remained extremely poor and worsened in several key areas. There were reports of forced confessions often extracted through torture. There were significant human rights abuses otherwise. The government often charged citizens with vague crimes such as anti-revolutionary behaviour, corruption on earth, waging war against God and crimes against Islam. The law in Iran provides for prosecution of persons accused of instigating crimes against the state or national security or insulting Islam, and that is the situation in which the claimant found himself.
 In terms of the situation of Baha’i, this is also well documented.
 Item 2.1 indicates that such individuals were charged with spreading propaganda against the regime through the Baha’i faith. Persons of Baha’i origin face discrimination and persecution in that country. The Baha’i faith is not a recognized religion. The authorities believe that it contradicted the tenets of Islam and this explains the problem which the people of the Baha’i faith continue to face in that country.
 Taken together I find that the claimant’s allegations that were put forth are objectively supported and I find that he does in fact face a serious possibility of persecution should he return to that country. In terms of whether he would have adequate state protection, given that the agent of persecution is the state, I find that adequate state protection would not be reasonably forthcoming. Therefore the claimant has rebutted the presumption of state protection.
 In terms of whether or not he would have a viable Internal Flight Alternative, item 1.7 of Exhibit 3 indicates that there is nationwide capacity of the centrally organized state security services which would make it difficult or unlikely for someone facing official attention to internally locate. So I find that you do not have a viable Internal Flight Alternative.
 In conclusion then I find that you will face as I state, a serious possibility of persecution in Iran for which you do not have adequate state protection or a viable Internal Flight Alternative. I therefore declare you to be a Convention refugee and accept your claim.———- REASONS CONCLUDED ———-