2022 RLLR 94

Citation: 2022 RLLR 94 
Tribunal: Refugee Protection Division 
Date of Decision: August 18, 2022 
Panel: Nour El-Sabah Farhat 
Counsel for the Claimant(s): Edward Bansah 
Country: Ghana 
RPD Number: TC0-11238 
Associated RPD Number(s): N/A 
ATIP Number: A-2023-01023 
ATIP Pages: N/A 

 
DECISION 
 
[1]        MEMBER: XXXX XXXX, the claimant, is a citizen of Ghana claiming refugee protection pursuant to section 96 and 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.  
 
[2]        The details of the claimant’s allegations are fully set out in the claimant’s Basis of Claim form narrative. In short, the claimant alleges that she fears persecution by her abusive husband if she returns to Ghana. Having considered the totality of the evidence, the Panel finds that the claimant has satisfied the burden of establishing a serious possibility of persecution on a Convention ground based on her membership in a particular social group as a woman. In fact, the Convention refugee ground of membership in a particular social group set out in section 96 of the IRPA and the Refugee Convention includes individuals fearing gender-based persecution. In deciding this claim, I have taken into consideration the Chairperson’s Guideline 4, gender consideration in proceedings before the Immigration and Refugee Board. In particular, the Panels considers that culture can impact how individuals interpret personal topics such as experiences of trauma, which can affect how they describe their experiences. The Panel also notes that in cases of gender-based violence, individuals may face difficulty in their hearing for several reasons, including shame, stigma, secrecy, and the cycle of power and control that can often contribute to such violence.  
 
[3]        With respect to the issue of identity, the claimant’s personal and national identity has been established, on a balance of probabilities, through a passport issued by the Republic of Ghana, copy of which was provided to the Board.  
 
[4]        Now on credibility. In assessing the credibility of the evidence presented by the claimant in support of her refugee claim, The Panel is guided by the principles established in the Federal Code of Appeals, Decision of Maldonado, when a claimant affirms to tell the truth, this creates a presumption of truthfulness unless there is evidence the contrary. In this case, the claimant has been candid and straightforward in her testimony. She has provided spontaneous and consistent details in support of her allegations and her refugee claim. There have been no contradictions or omissions that would go to the core of the claim. The Panel finds the claimant to be a credible witness and therefore believes what she has alleged in support of her claim. The claimant answered the questions of the Panel without hesitation and exaggeration and provided details when required. Further, the claimant’s testimony was consistent with her Basis of Claim form and the interview notes at the point of entry.  
 
[5]        The claimant testified that got she got married to XXXX XXXX (ph) in XXXX 2017. The couple was living in the city of XXXX. Shortly after, XXXX XXXX began getting physically, psychologically, and sexually abusive towards the claimant. The allegations of the claimant in regards to the abuse that she went through are corroborated by the psychotraumatology report that was submitted in support of the application of the claimant, and affidavits by her cousin, XXXX XXXX (ph), and her friends XXXX XXXX (ph). The claimant testified that XXXX XXXX would insult her and beat her with a belt to a point where she would have a swollen face and bruises all over her body. He would also threaten her on several occasions with a knife for small arguments. The claimant testified that when she asked XXXX XXXX for a divorce, he threatened to kill her if she brings the topic of divorce again. The Panel finds that, on a balance of probabilities, that the claimant was abused by her husband. When the claimant would talk or denounce the actions of XXXX to her family, her family would tell her to not report the incidents to the police because it would bring disgrace and shame to the family. The claimant testified that only her cousin, XXXX XXXX, told her that the abuse was unacceptable, and she should escape her husband. On XXXX XXXX, 2019, XXXX XXXX beat the claimant so violently that she wanted to report the incident to the police at XXXX, but her family prevented her from doing so because they did not want her husband to go to jail as her husband is perceived as an honourable man in the community. After this event, the claimant decided to run away from her husband to protect herself. She ran away on the XXXX 2019 by taking a taxi to stay with her friend, XXXX XXXX, who lived  in Accra. After the claimant ran away from XXXX, XXXX XXXX was able to find her in Accra in a matter of a week with the help of his men. In fact, the claimant testified that her husband became a wealthy over the last few years because he has a very successful business. He also created a lot of connections throughout the country because of his business and has men working for him that were able to locate the claimant. The Panel finds that, on a balance of probabilities, the claimant’s husband has connections throughout the country and was able to locate the claimant in Accra. After finding her in Accra, XXXX XXXX took his wife back home and told her that if she ran away again, he would kill her. After this, the sexual and physical abuse continued until the claimant left Ghana in XXXX 2020.  
 
[6]        Further, XXXX XXXX has been — the claimant’s husband, has been to the claimant’s parents’ residence numerous times since she left Ghana to ask about his wife’s — the claimant’s whereabouts. He has been threatening the claimant’s family and threatened that he will kill the claimant if he saw her again as she was his wife, and he had all rights over her. According to the claimant’s Basis of Claim form narrative and testimony, XXXX even physically attacked her mother that was admitted to the hospital because of the sustained injuries, particularly to her hand. The family reported the incident to the Ghanaian police who arrested XXXX XXXX. XXXX was released shortly after. The claimant indicated that XXXX has the financial means to pay bribes to the authorities to be released, and that might be the reason of his release by the police. According to the Panel, this speaks to the claimant’s credibility in that she did not try to speculate. These allegations are corroborated by the affidavit of the cousin of the claimant and by a medical report by Dr. XXXX (ph) confirming an assault on the claimant’s mother. The Panel finds that, on a balance of probabilities, that the mother of the claimant was attacked by XXXX and that he was arrested for this attack.  
 
[7]        During the hearing, when asked by the Panel if it was possible to call her mother in Ghana to confirm the incident, the claimant spontaneously accepted and called her mother. However, the mother of the claimant was not picking up the phone, as shown on the screen by the claimant. According to the Panel, the willingness and the spontaneity of the claimant to call her mom during the hearing talks to the credibility of the claimant and her allegations.  
 
[8]        The Panel finds that the claimant’s experiences of gender-based violence amount to persecution. The Panel considered the seriousness of the harm, the cumulative act of the agent of prosecution, and the fact that the harm is repetitive and persistent. The Panel therefore finds that the claimant has a subjective fear of persecution if she returns to Ghana, on a balance of probabilities.  
 
[9]        Now on the well-founded fear of persecution. According to the country documentary evidence, gender-based violence is alarmingly high in Ghana, and violence against women remains widespread throughout the country. As such, domestic violence is a serious and pervasive issue in Ghana. Some reports find that victims of domestic violence in Ghana generally do not report abuse because of the shame and the stigma associated to it. Support is not always forthcoming when victims approach relatives or even the police. The objective documentary evidence indicates that domestic violence is viewed as a private family matter in Ghana, and as a result, it is difficult for victims to report abuse and seek help. There is a stigma and shame associated with domestic violence in Ghana. Additionally, women’s access to justice in Ghana is embedded by gender norms, societal beliefs, and physical and cultural barriers who stigmatize women and prevent them from reporting incidents of domestic violence. The Panel finds that the claimant’s fear of persecution if she returns to Ghana is objectively well-founded. 
 
[10]       Now on state protection, according to the objective documentary evidence, inadequate capacity and awareness of law enforcement institution to enforce laws regarding violence against women remains an obstacle to addressing violence against women in Ghana. Survivor encounters with the state authority leave them often feeling revictimized. Additionally, corruption, in particular, was said to affect access to justice when perpetrators pay bribes or use their networks of influence to avoid persecution by the courts. Consequently, the Panel finds that the presumption of state protection has been rebutted. In fact, the mother of the claimant went to the police to report assault and did not receive the help that she required from the authorities. It would be objectively unreasonable for the claimant to seek the protection of the state in these circumstances, and that adequate state protection would not be reasonably forthcoming.  
 
[11]       Regarding internal flight alternative, in order to determine whether an IFA exists, the Panel must assess whether there is any location in Ghana in which the claimant would not face a serious possibility of persecution and whether it will be reasonable to expect her to move there. The safety of an IFA is dependent on the claimant’s personal profile. The Panel finds that the claimant does not have a viable IFA for the reasons explained below. With respect to motivation to pursue the claimant, given the history of the abuse, the long term nature of the violence, the fact that the claimant is viewed to have brought shame to her husband, and the ongoing threats to the claimant and her family, I find that the claimant’s husband would be motivated to track her down and harm her. I note that the claimant’s husband did pursue and locate the claimant in Accra, and I find that this also speaks to motivation. The Panel also finds, on a balance of probabilities, that the claimant’s husband would have the means to locate the claimant throughout Ghana. This is demonstrated by the fact that the claimant’s husband was able to locate her after a week of searching in Accra, a city which is approximately XXXX kilometers away from their hometown and home to 4.2 million people The fact that the claimant’s husband is a wealthy man with a lot of connections also speaks to his means to locate the claimant throughout Ghana. The Panel therefore finds that the agent of harm, the claimant’s husband, has the motivation and means to locate the claimant. Therefore, there will be a serious possibility of persecution throughout Ghana for the claimant and there is no viable internal flight alternative available to her.  
 
[12]       For the foregoing reasons, the Panel finds that the claimant is a convention refugee under section 96 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. Accordingly, the claim is accepted. 
 
 
——— REASONS CONCLUDED ———