Citation: 2022 RLLR 46
Tribunal: Refugee Protection Division
Date of Decision: November 10, 2022
Panel: Ryan Kim
Counsel for the Claimant(s): John W. Grice
Country: Pakistan
RPD Number: TC2-13132
Associated RPD Number(s): N/A
ATIP Number: A-2022-01960
ATIP Pages: N/A
DECISION
[1] MEMBER: Okay, we are back on the record. The Panel has considered the claimant’s testimony and the evidence in this case and is ready to render its decision orally. No, we cannot do simultaneous interpretation.
[2] INTERPRETER: I am sorry?
[3] MEMBER: We cannot do simultaneous interpretation.
[4] COUNSEL: I think it is clear that Mr. XXXX understands English, so I am ready to waive interpretation altogether. And also, Mister Member, I will be signing off, and I will have Ms. Dobrindt (ph) stay for the — listen to the reasons and take notes.
[5] MEMBER: Okay. All right. Perfect.
[6] COUNSEL: Thank you. Take care.
[7] MEMBER: Thank you so much. And so Mister Claimant, do you confirm that you waive your right to the interpretation of my decision?
[8] CLAIMANT (without interpreter): Thank you, Mister Member.
[9] MEMBER: So, that is a yes?
[10] CLAIMANT (without interpreter): Yes, Mister Member.
[11] MEMBER: Perfect. Thank you so much. Madam Interpreter, you can just be on standby.
[12] INTERPRETER: Okay.
[13] MEMBER: Thank you. Okay, so XXXX XXXX XXXX, the claimant, alleges to be a citizen of Pakistan. He is seeking refugee protection pursuant to sections 96 and 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
ALLEGATIONS
[14] The specifics of the claim are set out in the claimant’s Basis of Claim form. The following is a summary of the claimant’s allegations. The claimant alleges to be a citizen of Pakistan. He fears persecution at the hands of the Sunni extremist organization, Sipah-e-Sahaba, SSP, due to his religion as a Shia Muslim.
DETERMINATION
[15] Having considered the totality of the evidence, the Panel finds that the claimant is a Convention refugee pursuant to section 96 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act for being a Shia Muslim.
ANALYSIS
Identity
[16] The claimant’s personal and national identity has been established on a balance of probabilities through the documentation filed, namely, his Pakistani passport.
Credibility
[17] In making this determination, the Panel has considered all of the evidence, including the claimant’s testimony, the Basis of Claim form, and all of the documentary evidence entered as exhibits. When a claimant affirms to tell the truth, this creates a presumption of truthfulness, unless there is evidence to the contrary. The claimant provided a cogent testimony relating to his religion as a Shia Muslim, and how he became an active member of his imambargah. He testified that he was a XXXX in Pakistan, and he served as the XXXX XXXX of his imambargah starting in XXXX 2020. The claimant provided a consistent and detailed testimony about receiving threatening phone calls from SSP for his activities in his imambargah, and even though he reported the phone calls to the police, the police did not provide any assistance. The claimant testified in a straightforward manner about moving to Rawalpindi in XXXX 2021, and then to Lahore in XXXX, 2021 due to his fear of SSP, while continuing to receive threatening phone calls from SSP and that they knew of his locations that he had moved to in Rawalpindi and Lahore. The claimant provided a consistent testimony about receiving a threatening phone call in XXXX 2021, in which the caller threatened him to pay money if he wants to save his life.
[18] The claimant’s testimony was generally consistent, detailed, straightforward, and spontaneous. The Panel did not note any contradictions, inconsistencies, or omissions that would go the heart of the claim. Therefore, the Panel finds that the claimant was a credible witness and finds that the claimant has established his religious profile as a Shia Muslim.
[19] The claimant provided a number of documents in support of his claim, which includes the following. Documents corroborating that he was a XXXX in Pakistan, a letter from the imambargah in Pakistan confirming his membership as a Shia Muslim, and corroborating his allegations relating to his role as the (inaudible) secretary and receiving threats from SSP. A letter from the XXXX XXXX XXXX in Scarborough confirming his membership. An application for case registration, dated XXXX XXXX, 2020, relating to the threatening phone calls he received. A report at the police station in Lahore relating to the threatening phone call he received in XXXX of 2021. A letter from the XXXX XXXX he was employed corroborating his allegations relating to the threats he was receiving from SSP. And affidavits from family and friends corroborating his allegations relating to the threats he was receiving from SSP and moving to Rawalpindi as a result and continuing to receive threats even after moving. In light of the fact that the claimant’s testimony was consistent, and the documents offered in evidence corroborates his allegations, the Panel accords the documents considerable weight. Based on the totality of the evidence in this case, the Panel finds on a balance of probabilities that the claimant has established his profile as Shia Muslim and has established a subjective fear of persecution.
Well-Founded Fear of Persecution
[20] Country documentary evidence shows that societal violence due to religious intolerance remained a serious problem in Pakistan. Violence, abuse, and social and religious intolerance by militant organizations and other non-state actors, both local and foreign, contributed to a culture of lawlessness. Though as Muslims, Shias are free from certain restrictions affecting other religious groups, Shias are still regarded as apostates by some extremist Sunni groups and individuals. As a result, many face regular hostility from extremists and public calls fro members to be killed. There has been an increase in sectarian violence targeting Shia groups at least since 2012, with attacks primarily targeting ordinary Shia individuals. Though the escalation of violent attacks against Shia in the last decade has occurred alongside a general deterioration in the country’s security context, the specific attacks against Shias are distinct in character and intent to most political killings, armed conflict deaths, and indiscriminate violence against civilians. Bombings carried out by militant and terrorist organizations have targeted social gatherings and crowded Shia areas with near impunity. Armed sectarian groups, including Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, Taliban, Pakistan, and the once banned anti-Shia group SSP, which is connected to other organizations banned by the government as extremists, and groups designated as terrorist organizations by the United States and other governments, continue to stage attacks targeting Shia Muslims. Throughout the year, unidentified individuals targeted and killed Shia Muslims in attacks believed to be religious motivated. Human rights activists reported numerous instances of societal violence related to allegations of blasphemy, of efforts by individuals to coerce religious minorities to convert to Islam, and of societal, harassment, discrimination, and threats of violence directed at members of religious minority community. Sunni groups held three (3) large rallies in Karachi in September, in which speakers warned Shia Muslims of dire consequences, including beheadings, if they continue to blaspheme against their Prophet Mohammed’s companions. Police are generally unable to stop attacks when they have occurred and have failed to prevent and investigate in a meaningful way. The claimant has established his profile as a Shia Muslim. Based on the claimant’s personal experiences and the documentary evidence, the Panel finds that his fear of return to Pakistan to have an objective basis. The claimant has established, on a balance of probabilities, a well-founded fear of persecution in Pakistan.
State Protection
[21] Except in situations where the state is in complete breakdown, states must be presumed capable of protecting their citizens. In this case, the country documents show that the authorities are unable to offer adequate protection as previously discussed. Shias are attacked with impunity, and the state is unable to prevent this in any meaningful way. Accordingly, the Panel finds that state protection is not adequate, and the presumption of state protection is rebutted.
Internal Flight Alternative
[22] An internal flight alternative arises when claimants who otherwise meet all the elements of the definition of a Convention refugee in their home area of the country nevertheless are neither a Convention refugee nor a person in need of protection because he can live safety elsewhere in that country. Religious intolerance and subsequent societal violence is a widespread and serious problem in Pakistan. Therefore, I find that the claimant faces a serious possibility of persecution throughout the entire country, and there is no viable internal flight alternative for the claimant in Pakistan.
CONCLUSION
[23] For the foregoing reasons, the Panel finds that the claimant is a Convention refugee under section 96 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. The Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada therefore accepts his claim for refugee protection.
——— REASONS CONCLUDED ———