2023 RLLR 194

Citation: 2023 RLLR 194
Tribunal: Refugee Protection Division
Date of Decision: December 15, 2023
Panel: V. MacDonald
Counsel for the Claimant(s): Awais Khan
Country: Pakistan
RPD Number: TC3-08055
Associated RPD Number(s): N/A
ATIP Number: A-2024-01010
ATIP Pages: N/A

 

DECISION

[1]                   XXXX XXXX XXXX (the “Claimant”) claims to be a citizen of Pakistan and is claiming refugee protection in Canada pursuant to section 96 and subsection 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (the IRPA).[1]

ALLEGATIONS

[2]                   The Claimant’s allegations are at Exhibit 2. In summary, he alleges that he became engaged to his father’s business partner’s (“MSB”) daughter XXXX shortly before coming to Canada for XXXX XXXX XXXX studies. He alleges that MSB was a relative of the Ex-Minister of Punjab government AAK. He alleges that in XXXX 2020 MSB and his father purchased a property for the business, but MSB had the sale deed issued only in his name, not both of their names. That in XXXX 2021 the Claimant’s father requested he be reimbursed the money for his portion of the property and MSB refused. 

[3]                   That on XXXX XXXX 2021 AAK phoned the Claimant’s father and made death threats against him if he continued to request the money and his father realized he was a victim of fraud by his business partner. That the Claimant’s father then attempted to file a police complaint but the police refused to file one.

[4]                   That on XXXX XXXX 2021 MSB and armed goons attacked the Claimant’s father’s home causing the family to relocate to a relative’s house. That on XXXX XXXX 2021 the Claimant’s father and brother made a formal police complaint against their local station. That on XXXX XXXX 2021 an officer from the local police station warned the family for submitting this complaint. On XXXX XXXX 2021 the Claimant’s father filed a petition in court.

[5]                   That on XXXX XXXX 2021 the Claimant’s father decided to end the engagement between the Claimant and XXXX. That on XXXX XXXX 2021 the Claimant’s father received a threatening phone call from MSB regarding the cancelled engagement and the court case.

[6]                   That since the end of the engagement and the petition in court, the Claimant’s family has been attacked, threatened, and forced to relocate several times due to an ongoing campaign of harassment by AAK and MSB. That the Claimant has been explicitly named by MSB and workers of AAK as having dishonoured the family and threatened with death as a result.

[7]                   That the Claimant fears returning to Pakistan and being a victim of an honour crime for the broken engagement and that he too will be a victim of a pattern of ongoing harassment due to his father’s business dealings. 

DETERMINATION

[8]                   The Claimant has, on a balance of probabilities, established that he is a Convention refugee pursuant to section 96 of the IRPA on the basis of being part of a particular social group those targeted for an honour killing.

ANALYSIS

Identity

[9]                   The national and personal identity of the Claimant is established on a balance of probabilities by his testimony and a copy of his Pakistani passport filed at Exhibit 1.

Credibility and fact finding

[10]                   There is a presumption of truth where the claimant swears certain facts are true unless there is a valid reason to doubt their veracity. The determination regarding whether a claimant’s evidence is credible is made on a balance of probabilities.[2]  During the course of his testimony the Claimant was spontaneous and detailed, where he did not know the answer to questions posed by the panel he refrained from speculating and he spoke in an unembellished manner. The panel found the claimant to be generally credible, his testimony did not contain any major inconsistencies or omissions which go to the heart of his claim and therefore the presumption of truth remains, and the panel believes what he has alleged.

[11]                   Specifically, the panel believes that the Claimant was engaged to the daughter of his father’s former business partner MSB. That the engagement was ended when MSB cheated his father in a business deal effectively stealing the value of the property from him. That his father launched a court case against MSB, the local police, and MSB’s relative AAK who is a politician. That since XXXX 2021 MSB and AAK continue to attack the Claimant’s family and look for the Claimant due to a perceived dishonour against their family for ending the engagement. That MSB and AAK have attacked the Claimant’s brother and father and have made death threats against the Claimant should he ever return to Pakistan.

[12]                   In support of his claim, the Claimant tendered personal disclosure at Exhibit 6. The panel finds the below documents corroborate the allegations of the Claimant:

·      The affidavit of the brother at Exhibit 6, corroborate the ongoing effort of MSB and AAK to find the Claimant, the XXXX XXXX 2021 attack on the parents’ home, and the attempt by the Claimant’s father to register a complaint against AAK and MSB and the local police;

·      The affidavit of his Uncle at Exhibit 6, which corroborates the attempts by the Claimant’s family to relocate following MSB and AAK’s attack on their home;

·      The court documents at Exhibit 6, which corroborates the ongoing legal battle between the Claimant’s father and MSB which immediately preceded the end of the Claimant’s engagement;

·      The affidavit of his cousin at Exhibit 6, which corroborates the police and workers of AAK attempting to locate the Claimant on XXXX XXXX 2021;

·      The FIR at Exhibit 6, which corroborates the XXXX XXXX 2022 attack on the Claimant’s brother and specifically mentions the death threats made against the Claimant;

·      The Affidavit of his father at Exhibit 6, which corroborates the XXXX XXXX 2023 attack on his brother while searching for the Claimant.

[13]                   The panel finds that there is no reason to doubt the veracity of these documents and has given them full weigh in consideration in this claim.

Well-Founded Fear of Persecution

 

Subjective fear is established

[14]                   The Claimant provided credible testimony and therefore his subjective fear is established on a balance of probabilities.

 

Objective basis is established

[15]                   The National Documentation Package for Pakistan indicates that honour killing is the murder of men or women who are accused of violating social taboos or damaging the honour of an entire family. Sources indicate that women in Pakistan are considered to be the ‘carriers’ of the honour of the entire family and that honour crimes and killings are a way to restore honour to a family.[3] This item also indicates that although men are not as frequently targeted that they do comprise an estimated 30% of deaths classified as honour killings. As honour killings are often unreported or covered up by relatives and sympathetic police officers, the estimated 1000 honour killings each year in Pakistan[4] is a conservative estimate and remains a serious and persistent problem within Pakistan. [5]

[16]                   As one of the agents of persecution, AAK, is a politician the Claimant’s fear that he could be located by local police and his location could become known to MSB and AAK is objectively well founded. The police are widely considered one of the most corrupt organizations in Pakistan and the situation having deteriorated in the last five years.[6] Reports indicate that some factors contributing to the corruption of police forces including poor working conditions, low salaries, lack of accountability, and in particular political influence.[7] There is mixed evidence before the board about the success rate of police ability to track individuals. However, the evidence is clear that the use of the National ID card in day-to-day life for Pakistani citizens over 18 touches most aspects of public facing life including obtaining a SIM card, opening bank accounts, and in the process of completing a tenant registration and criminal record check. Tenant registration is required across Pakistan and is conducted when the landlord submits the tenant information to the police station which is then used to conduct a background check including contact with the local police station from where the tenant comes.[8] Given this is mandatory the panel concludes that his location would be discoverable by the local police who have already shown that they are in league with one of the agents of persecution AAK.

[17]                   Accordingly, the panel finds that the Claimant’s fears have an objective basis and is therefore well-founded.

State Protection

[18]                   The objective evidence states that legislation criminalizing honour crimes is inadequate and the actual implementation of policies and guidelines fall well short of providing actual protection to survivors or victims as well as fall short of ensuring punishment for perpetrators.[9] In addition to the well-known problems with the legislation to address honour crimes is the permissibility of it by community members including sympathetic police officers. It’s established that police officers largely treat honour crimes as private family affairs. 

[19]                   Additionally, its well established that police are among the most corrupt institution within Pakistan. Police officers are typically underpaid, under resourced, and inefficient. Economic factors can expose officers to criminal influence, bribery, or collecting money to pursue or refuse to pursue cases for political motivation or economic reasons.[10] 

[20]                   As a result of the above, the panel finds that adequate state protection is not available to the Claimant. The presumption of state protection is therefore rebutted.

Internal Flight Alternative

[21]                   The panel finds that the test fails on the first prong and that the Claimant faces a serious possibility of persecution throughout Pakistan.

[22]                   The panel has considered that in order for MSB and AAK to not learn of the location of the claimant that the Claimant would have to continue to cut contact with his family or ask that his family put themselves in danger to conceal his location. The Federal Court has found that it is unreasonable for a Claimant to have to cut all contact with family and friends in order to avoid being found in an IFA and that to require this amount to a claimant being forced to hide.[11]

[23]                   The continued motivation of MSB is an effort to restore his family honour following the cancellation of the engagement between the Claimant and MSB’s daughter. Given the substantial motivation this provides the panel concludes that there is no safe place within Pakistan for the claimant to return to.

CONCLUSION

[24]                   On the totality of the evidence the panel concludes that the Claimant has credibly established that he faces a serious possibility of persecution in Pakistan pursuant to Section 96 of the IRPA on the basis of Particular Social Group – individual targeted for an honour killing.

[25]                   As a result, his claim is therefore accepted.

 

——— REASONS CONCLUDED ———

 

 

[1]   The Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, S.C. 2001, c. 27 as amended by the Protecting Canada’s Immigration System Act, S.C. 2012, c.17 (the “Act” or “IRPA”).

[2] Maldonado v Canada (Minister of Employment and Immigration), [1980] 2 FC 302.

[3] National Documentation Package for Pakistan (31 July 2023), at item 5.1, “Honour killings targeting men and women” Research Directorate Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, PAK104257. E.

[4] National Documentation Package for Pakistan (31 July 2023), at item 5.5, “Domestic violence, involving a spouse or other family members; legislation, protect and support services available to victims (2017-January 2020).” Research Directorate Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, PAK106392.E.

[5] National Documentation Package for Pakistan (31 July 2023), at item 5.1.

[6] National Documentation Package for Pakistan (31 July 2023), at item 10.1“Police corruption and procedures to file a complaint against the police, including authorities responsible for receiving complaints; instances of successful complaint cases; police record keeping procedures (2019-December 2022)”, Research Directorate Immigration and Refugee Protection Board.

[7] Ibid.

[8] National Documentation Package for Pakistan (31 July 2023), at item 10.6.

[9] National Documentation Package for Pakistan (31 July 2023), at item 5.1.

[10] National Documentation Package for Pakistan (31 July 2023), at item 10.1.

[11] Zamora Huertas v Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2008 FC 586.