Citation: 2022 RLLR 53
Tribunal: Refugee Protection Division
Date of Decision: September 15, 2022
Panel: Priya Kissoon
Counsel for the Claimant(s): Yuliya Dumansk
Country: Cuba
RPD Number: TC2-07115
Associated RPD Number(s): N/A
ATIP Number: A-2022-01960
ATIP Pages: N/A
DECISION
[1] MEMBER: So this is the decision in the claim for refugee protection made by XXXX XXXX XXXX, file number TC2-07115. You are claiming to be a citizen of Cuba and are claiming refugee protection pursuant to sections 96 and 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. I find you are a Convention refugee within the meaning of section 96 of the IRPA for the following reasons.
[2] In terms of the allegations, the full allegations are set out in your Basis of Claim form. In summary, you fear persecution at the hands of the Cuban authorities on account of your political opinion and political activities against the Cuban government.
[3] You have established your identity on a balance of probabilities as a citizen of Cuba with the certified true copy of your Cuban passport.
[4] You have a nexus to the Convention because of your political opinion. You believe that a political opinion was imputed to you owing to your travels to Canada and that you also expressed a political opinion outright by sharing photos from your trip to Canada at the XXXX you were assigned which contrasts with conditions in Cuba and resulted in verbal reprimand and demotion specifically
[5] 5. [HK1] While holding a position of power and authority in your role as XXXX XXXX, the expression of your views on the differences between Canada and Cuba were perceived to be a threat by the authorities. You also participated in protests and have observed differences in the handling of these in Cuba and in Canada. And given this your claim was analyzed under section 96 of the IRPA.
[6] You testified in a straightforward way without any inconsistencies or omissions. And overall, I found you to be credible and I accept your allegations. You offered detailed testimony about your work history, particularly following your first trip to Canada. Your testimony about your employment was consistent with the information you provided in Exhibit 1 and your BOC, that is your Basis of Claim, in Exhibit 2. You corroborated your work history with copies of your XXXX XXXX and a letter from the office of XXXX XXXX found at Exhibit 5, pages 8 and 11. I find you have established on a balance of probabilities that you held position of status and authority as a XXXX XXXX and then as a XXXX XXXX (inaudible) in a XXXX and as a XXXX. While in these positions, you made a few trips to Canada. Following your first trip you were demoted and transferred from XXXX to the XXXX XXXX XXXX. Starting your position as XXXX XXXX XXXX, after returning from your first trip abroad, you testified that you shared photos with colleagues and XXXX and your observations about differences in the conditions of life in Canada and in Cuba. You testified that the XXXX authorities perceived these to be counter revolutionary and you were reprimanded twice, once in private by the XXXX and once by the XXXX and the committee. You testified that you continued to show photos and express your thoughts to those who were interested. You also continued to travel to Canada. You were eventually terminated from your position as XXXX XXXX on XXXX 2019 and you testified that you were unable to find another placement after this termination despite your years and experience in XXXX.
[7] You made another trip to Canada following this termination and stayed with your daughter, who lives in Canada, for about XXXX (XXXX) months. On return to Cuba, you were in COVID lockdown for most of 2020 and 2021. However, in XXXX 2021 you and your son participated in the national protests in Cuba and owing to this participation you faced a number of summonses and you felt like you were being monitored. Your last summons resulted in a warning that if you protested again, you would be arrested. Your BOC indicates that that last summons was in XXXX 2021. Following this warning, you fled to Canada where you demonstrated a commitment to your political opinion by protesting with your daughter against oppression in Cuba. You disclosed a photo to corroborate your participation in that protest which took place in XXXX XXXX, 2021. You testified about your observations of the different treatment of protesters in Canada compared to Cuba and it was clear from your testimony that you are impassioned about your opposition the Cuban government and its treatment of citizens. On a balance of probabilities, I find that you have established your political opinion, imputed and otherwise. Given the relationship between your travel and demotion and termination as well as your testimony about being questioned by authorities following on your participation in the XXXX XXXX protests, I also find that you have established on a balance of probabilities that you faced harm owing to your political opinion. Therefore, I find you have established on a balance of probabilities a subjective fear of persecution in Cuba.
[8] I am satisfied that your opposition to the Cuban government is a genuine and legitimate expression of your political opinion. And I also found that you have an objective basis for your subjective fear of persecution given the evidence from the Cuban National Documentation Package or NDP. The objective evidence shows that similar protesters in Cuba have faced repression by the government. According to Item 2.1 of the NDP, the Cuban regime is noted as having significant human rights abuses including abuse of political dissidence, detainees and prisoners by security forces, arbitrary arrest and detentions, significant problems with independence of the judiciary and arbitrary or unlawful interference with privacy. Cuba is an authoritarian state with only one (1) legal political party and Cuban security forces have committed numerous abuses against civilians. The NDP indicates that XXXX is a high-status occupation in Cuba and XXXX are highly qualified. Item 2.3 indicates that material on human rights was confiscated as counter revolutionary by authorities. The Cuban government has denied access to XXXX to XXXX who held political and religious views that differ from the state and Item 2.11 indicates that, “XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Given the status of your position and that you spoke out, I believe that you have established an objective basis to your fear of persecution should you return to Cuba. But moreover, specifically referring to your participation in protests, the government regularly engages in censorship and imposes restrictions on the right of peaceful assembly. Government authorities perpetrate forced disappearances, political dissidents are regularly imprisoned and face degrading and life-threatening treatment in prison. And according to Item 2.1 the arbitrary arrests are common. Items 2.12 and 2.14 state that Cuban authorities recently detained hundreds of protesters who attended demonstrations on July the 11th, 2021. And In a Human Rights report cited in Item 2.12, President Miguel Diaz-Canel, on Sunday, July the 11th, 2021, “Urged government supporters and security forces to respond to protests violently saying we call on all revolutionaries to go to the streets to defend the revolution.” “He said, the order to fight has been given.” Articles you disclosed indicate that hundreds of people were detained during protest including ordinary citizens, where onlookers received months in prison and other sentences of more than a decade for public disorders, sedition and other charges were placed. Item 2.1 also indicates that Cuban government has increased arbitrary arrest powers under the pretext of COVID-19 pandemic. So on a balance of probabilities you have been identified as being an opposition to the government through your political expression and should you return to Cuba you would face detention or arrest like others who are similarly situated. Having considered the objective evidence together with your consistent and credible testimony, I find that your subjective fear of persecution is well-founded. As such, I find you would face a serious possibility of persecution should you return to Cuba.
[9] Regarding state protection and an internal flight alternative, you fear the Cuban state and you have testified that you cannot move anywhere in Cuba because state authorities can find you anywhere in the country. I agree with this and based on the documentary evidence, I find on a balance of probabilities that you would not be able to avail yourself of the protection of the authorities in Cuba and adequate state protection is not available to you. I am satisfied that you have rebutted the presumption of state protection. And given that the current actions taken by the state against political oppositions nationwide, there is no internal flight alternative throughout Cuba available to you. It is established in law that there is no internal flight alternative or state protection when you credibly fear state authorities.
[10] In conclusion, based on the totality of the evidence I find that pursuant to section 96 of the IRPA you have established a serious possibility of persecution on a Convention ground, namely, your political opinion. Therefore, your claim for protection is accepted.
[11] Mister Interpreter?
[12] CLAIMANT: Thanks to my lawyer for carrying out this process as well. To you, Madam Member, I wish you well. Thank you, interpreter.
[13] INTERPRETER: Thank you very much.
[14] MEMBER: Congratulations to you and welcome to Canada.
[15] CLAIMANT: God bless you, Madam Member.
[16] MEMBER: Okay. Just take care. Thank you, Mister Interpreter. Thank you, Counsel. Take care. Take care.
[17] COUNSEL: Thank you, Madam Member. What graceful questioning it was.
[18] MEMBER: Thank you.
[19] COUNSEL: What graceful questioning it was.
[20] MEMBER: Thank you. Take care.
[21] COUNSEL: Thank you. Bye-bye.
[22] MEMBER: Bye.
[23] COUNSEL: Thank you, Mister Interpreter.
[24] MEMBER: Thank you.
[25] INTERPRETER: Thank you.
[26] MEMBER: Bye.
——— REASONS CONCLUDED ———
[HK1]Note that this seems to be a formatting error in the original text