2022 RLLR 117
Citation: 2022 RLLR 117
Tribunal: Refugee Protection Division
Date of Decision: February 22, 2022
Panel: Candida Quinn
Counsel for the Claimant(s): James Hill Lawson
Country: Georgia
RPD Number: TB9-17568
Associated RPD Number(s): N/A
ATIP Number: A-2023-01023
ATIP Pages: N/A
DECISION
[1] MEMBER: This is the decision of the Refugee Protection Division in the claim of XXXX XXXX on February 22nd, 2022, claim number TB9-17568.
[2] The duty of this Panel is to find if there is sufficient credible trustworthy evidence to determine if there is more than a “mere possibility” that the claimant would be persecuted if returned to Georgia. In doing so I have considered in its totality the testimony, the documentary evidence and submissions by your counsel. I have also applied the principles of the IRB Chairperson’s Guideline 9: Regarding Sexual Orientations, Gender Identities and Expressions of Sexual Characteristics that differ from societal norms in their country’s cultural environments.
[3] After reviewing the evidence in its totality and applying these guidelines the Panel has decided that Mr. XXXX is a Convention refugee.
Allegations
[4] COUNSEL: I’m sorry, Madam Member, I couldn’t hear what you said you determined that he?
[5] MEMBER: Is a Convention refugee.
[6] COUNSEL: Is, okay, nice and clear, good. Thank you.
[7] MEMBER:
Allegations
[8] The claimant’s allegations are laid out in full in his Basis of Claim form and accompanying narrative. In summary he alleges multiple attacks and threats by opponents of the SOGIESC community in Georgia on account of his bisexual identity and relationships including hostility by Georgian law enforcement. He fears continued abuse on this basis if returned to Georgia.
Identity
[9] The Panel finds that the claimant has established his identity, his personal identity and his citizenship and his national identity by his Georgian passport issued October 2017.
Nexus
[10] The Panel finds a connection between the claimant’s allegations and one (1) of the protected grounds namely the particular social group of Georgian men perceived by others in society as other than heterosexual. That is to say with other sexual orientations, gender identities and expressions of sexual characteristics.
Credibility
[11] I have found the claimant to be a credible witness and therefore accept what he has alleged in support of his claim. The claimant testified in a straightforward manner and there were no material inconsistencies in his testimony or contradictions between his testimony and the other evidence before me.
[12] Claimant’s testimony described three (3) attacks from his narrative that caused him to be afraid of returning to Georgia, in XXXX 2019, XXXX 2018 and XXXX 2019. He testified about the details of these physical and verbal attacks, the injuries received, the medical treatment and a dismissive or abusive response by the police including at the police station.
[13] The claimant has supplemented his testimony with a detailed narrative of events, three (3) medical reports and three (3) letters of support each of which corroborate the details of the attacks. He has also provided and testified about photos of himself at a gay pride event in Canada with a former partner in Georgia and as a child wearing a skirt which he testified he enjoyed doing. The photos corroborate his SOGIESC identity, these details are all probative of the claim.
[14] I find on the balance of probabilities that the claimant has suffered repeated humiliation, threats and beatings that rise to the level of harm sufficiently serious to amount to persecution. I also find that the claimant has established a subjective fear of the agents of harm. I find that the persecution suffered is linked and suffered and cleared, excuse me is a linked to the Convention ground of the particular social group of SOGIESC persons in Georgia.
Country Conditions
[15] Objective evidence of the treatment of SOGIESC persons in Georgia establishes on a balance of probabilities the well-foundedness of the claimant’s fear of persecution. Both the National Documentation Package, NDP. dated June 30, 2021 and claimant’s disclosure provide evidence of persecution of bisexual persons. Legal protection for this group among others has been on the books according to NDP Tab 6.2, legal situation of LGBTI persons in Georgia, human rights, education and monitoring centre, Lakajalagnea (ph) 2016 that protection has not been forthcoming however and going to the police is frequently futile or results in even more abuse.
[16] The US Department of State Human Rights report for 2020 at Tab 2.1 of the NDP reported about “systemic violence, oppression, abuse, intolerance and discrimination” against LGBTQ persons that year. NGOs within Georgia reported last year that the governmental institutions appointed to deal with the persecution were either ineffective or complicit in furthering it, IBID at 61.
State Protection
[17] The Panel has also considered whether state protection is available to the claimant and concluded that it is not because of the complicity of the police. I therefore find that state protection would not reasonably be forthcoming for this claimant. Indeed the claimant reported the attacks he described to the police in Georgia and received no help along with derogatory, dismissive, abusive comments by them.
Internal Flight Alternative
[18] Finally the Panel has considered whether a viable Internal Flight Alternative exists for the claimant. Given the totality of the evidence I find on a balance of probabilities that the claimant cannot live freely in Georgia and that therefore no IFA exists for him there.
CONCLUSION
[19] Consequently for the reasons given and upon consideration of the whole of the evidence the Refugee Protection Division determines that the claimant has established a serious possibility of persecution on the basis of the claimant’s sexual orientation per Section 96 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. This concludes this hearing at 12:05 p.m.
——— REASONS CONCLUDED ———