2023 RLLR 198

Citation: 2023 RLLR 198
Tribunal: Refugee Protection Division
Date of Decision: December 13, 2023
Panel: Mihaela Kerezova
Counsel for the Claimant(s): Idorenyin E. Amana
Country: Nigeria
RPD Number: TC3-18282
Associated RPD Number(s): N/A
ATIP Number: A-2024-01010
ATIP Pages: N/A

 

DECISION

 

[1] MEMBER: These are the reasons for the decision in the claim of XXXX XXXX XXXX, with file number TC3-18282. 

 

[2] You’re claiming to be a citizen of Nigeria and you’re claiming refugee protection pursuant to sections 96 and subsection 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. 

 

[3] I have considered your testimony at the hearing today and all the other supporting evidence before me, including your Exhibits 5.1 to 5.4 and the objective evidence, and I am rendering my decision orally for today’s hearing. 

 

[4] The written decision will come to you shortly, which may be amended for grammar and may include specific citations to exhibits and case law as needed.

 

ALLEGATIONS

 

[5] The allegations of your claim are fully set out in your detailed Basis of Claim form and its amendment. 

 

[6] In summary, you allege that there is a risk to your life at the hands of an influential politician by the name of H. S., who is ex-Minister of the cabinet, and due to the personal vendetta against you and your mother, because your family is in a possession of information about embezzlement schemes and abuse of money allocations, and because your mother declined to accept such bribes and to become part of it. When these people could not get to your mother, they targeted you as means to send message to your mother and to achieve their goals. 

 

[7] You allege that you were kidnapped on XXXX XXXX of 2019 and you were harmed and tortured by the kidnappers at that time, which resulted in injuries you have sustained. 

 

[8] You allege that if you return back to Nigeria, you will be kidnapped again, tortured and maybe even killed. 

 

[9] You also allege there is no state protection for you in Nigeria, as the police dismissed the case when your mother filed a report of a missing person and there is also no internal flight alternative for you anywhere you go in Nigeria. 

 

[10] You became aware of the real reason why these people are after you, only when you were kept in captivity for three (3) days when you overheard the conversation of your kidnappers, who were discussing the money and location scheme at your mother’s workplace. You testified you were able to escape after three (3) days because you were shouting loud and some people were able to come and rescue you. 

 

[11] You then called your mother, who came to get you and immediately took you to the hospital on the way back. 

 

[12] The threats after your kidnapping continued and your mother therefore was forced to take you and your brother first to Benue State and then to relocate to Lagos, where you stayed up until the time you left the country. 

 

[13] You left from Abuja fearing for your life and safety on XXXX XXXX of 2019 and you initially fled to the United States, where you have made an attempt to file for an asylum, but it was never acknowledged by the U.S. authorities. 

 

[14] Therefore, you decided to come to Canada because you were afraid to return to Nigeria and you arrived in Canada on November 4th of 2022 to seek Canada’s protection. 

 

DETERMINATION

 

[15] For the reasons to follow, I find that you are a person in need of protection pursuant to section 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and I accept your claim. 

 

[16] And now rendering my decision orally. 

 

Identity     

 

[17] Your personal and national identity as a citizen of Nigeria has been established by your oral testimony and through the documentary evidence provided in your Exhibit 1, claim referral information, where a certified copy of your Nigerian passport can be seen. 

 

Nexus

 

[18] With respect to your allegations of risk to your life, at the hands of politician and associated with him individuals, I find that the nexus has not been established. The threats made against you stand from a personal vendetta formed against you and your family members because of your mother, and because your agents of harm are seeking revenge against all of you, based on the information that may expose their malicious deeds and may ruin the reputation of the politician. 

 

[19] This is not formed on any of the five (5) Convention grounds and therefore, I find that your claim is to be assessed under subsection 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. 

 

Credibility

 

[20] I find you to be a very credible witness. You testified today in a sincere and straightforward manner. There were no inconsistencies in your testimony or contradictions between your testimony and the other evidence before the Panel.

 

[21] You testified that you were forcefully taken by your kidnappers on XXXX XXXX of 2019, while you were running some errands for your mother. 

 

[22] You provided details on how your mother reported this to the police because you were missing, but no investigation was initiated, as a result of that. Instead, the case was dismissed, which made you reluctant to make further attempts to seek protection from the authorities, who you testified are corrupt and are not able to protect you. 

 

[23] You have provided through your testimony today details about the influence and the power of the
ex-Minister from the cabinet, who you identified as the agent of harm and how all of his schemes that happened at your mother’s workplace, included criminal activities. You also testified that other politicians also had problems with your mother because of her involvement in non-government organization of her own and because through her problems there, she enlightens other women in Nigeria about their rights. 

 

[24] Your claim is well-supported through the documentary evidence you have provided at Exhibit 5.3, total of 24 pages. Among the most notable documents, I refer to the police report seen at C-3; the medical report seen at C-5 and your mother’s involvement and her work in the community through the NGO seen at C-8. I also referred to the affidavit from your mother seen at C-11. 

 

[25] Today she was ready and willing to appear as a witness at this hearing. 

 

[26] But I found that was not necessary because you were able to provide direct and spontaneous testimony to establish your allegations. 

 

[27] I also find that the affidavit she provided in Exhibit 5.4 corroborates to that testimony.   

 

[28] All of the documents you have provided in your disclosures corroborate to your testimony and to who your agents of harm are and how they’re able to harm you. How they wish to hurt and still continue acting with impunity with the help of the corrupt authorities and the police to fulfill their schemes. 

 

[29] I have no reason to doubt the genuineness of your supporting documents and therefore, I assign full weight to all of them in support of your claim. 

 

[30] With respect to your stay in the United States and the possibility of having a claim there, I accept your testimony today that your claim there was not successful because you failed to submit the application for asylum the proper way. 

 

[31] I also turned to the Minister’s correspondence from November 28 of 2023, that they do not have such information about a claim initiated by you and they have not received confirmation from their U.S. counterparts and the fact that it has not been confirmed and therefore, you cannot be found ineligible, according to subsection A101(1)(c.1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act. 

 

[32] I therefore find, on a balance of probabilities, that you do not have a refugee claim initiated in the United States and that you have filed your refugee claim at your first available opportunity when you came to Canada. 

 

[33] In light of all the evidence before me today, I find, on a balance of probabilities, that you were indeed kidnapped on XXXX XXXX of 2019, you were threated with death and you were harmed, even after your mother complained to the police. 

 

[34] As no police protection was forthcoming to you, as you testified today, you told me that you do not have the financial means of bribing the police to be able to receive such protection. All of this resulted in revenge and subsequent targeting of you and all of your family members because of the knowledge of the information related to your mother’s workplace. 

 

[35] The risk for you continues to exist in Nigeria and I take your testimony today that your mother is now in the United States, where she filed a refugee claim on the same grounds as you did and also, your brother who had to flee to Ghana and remains there to this date because he does not have visa to the United States. 

 

[36] When I asked you today what made you so special for your agents of harm for you to be targeted by them, you explained that it is the knowledge of the information about their schemes that you may divulge. And this is the reason why they will continue to look for you and torture you upon your return. And you will likely face kidnapping again and violence, if you return to your country. 

 

[37] This is in light of the influence and the capacity of the politician and the associated with him, agents of harm. 

 

[38] Therefore, based on the influence and the level of authority, I find, on a balance of probabilities, that your level of risk in Nigeria is increased. 

 

[39] Considering the nature of the threats that have been directed at you, I find that you have established, on a balance of probabilities, that the risk you have faced to your life is not one that is generally faced by others in Nigeria. 

 

[40] I therefore find that you have been personally targeted because of the influence of your agents of harm, who is the ex-Minister with initials H. S. and because your agents of harm have now formed a personal vendetta against you and all of your family members, which translated in persecution for you anywhere in Nigeria. 

 

Objective Basis

 

[41] The objective basis for your alleged risk of harm is also well-established. 

 

[42] The National Documentation Package on Nigeria in Exhibit 3 provides ample objective evidence regarding issues related to corruption and financial crimes in Nigeria. 

 

[43] Sources report that Nigerian government has attempted to reduce corruption in public and private institutions. However, this practice remains pervasive. Senior law enforcement and anticorruption officials have faced corruption allegations in recent years, according to Item 2.2 of the NDP. 

 

[44] Despite that established anti-corruption legal framework, international observers report enforcement remains weak and corruption is widespread and pervasive across all areas of society. Diversion of public funds is a common system of patronage and nepotism and it exists in public institutions, as per Item 1.8 of the NDP, which also provides evidence of politicians engaging in acts of violence, including corruption and abuse of power for their own personal gain. 

 

[45] The objective evidence demonstrates that violence by politicians is not limited to general elections and political events, as per Item 1.13 of the NDP. Rather, this item describes corruption in the police force and criminalization of civil cases whereby police are paid money usually by politicians to lock up or detain someone. It has been reported that Nigeria has seen in an increase in grave violations in the form of rape, killings, detentions, abductions and attacks. 

 

[46] According to Item 7.3 of the NDP, multiple sources in the country condition documents note that even the targeting of average or middle class Nigerians increased since 2013. 

 

[47] Finally, as seen in Item 1.18, again, there is a rise in fatalities from kidnapping attempts from those who cannot afford to pay their ransom. 

 

[48] In light of the objective documentary evidence surrounding politicians engaging in acts of violence persistent brought (ph) and corruption committed by the government officials and police, as well as the lack of laws in place to effectively protect individuals who become victims of such politicians, I therefore find, on a balance of probabilities, that your risk of harm has an objective basis. 

 

State Protection

 

[49] I have also considered whether state protection is available to you in Nigeria. 

[50] The objective evidence before me provides evidence of inefficiencies in the Nigerian police force. It is the principal law enforcement agency, which Nigerians often described as corrupt and violent. This includes reports that police frequently abuses (ph) their powers, as per Item 7.4 of the NDP. 

 

[51] Police are identified as one of the top (inaudible) of public officials to whom bribes are most commonly paid in Nigeria, as per Item 7.5. 

 

[52] As per Item 1.11 of the NDP, the objective evidence demonstrates that Nigeria is not only lacking in enough police officers, but almost half of them are responsible for protecting VIPs, such as politicians, businessmen and other wealthy individuals. 

 

[53] Police have been reported to aid criminals and police is soliciting bribes and this is a social norm in Nigeria. 

 

[54] With respect to judiciary, corruption is also reported to be a problem in the courts and sources state there is a widespread public perception that judges are easily bribed, and litigants cannot rely on courts to render impartial verdicts, as per Item 1.8 of the NDP. 

 

[55] Considering the objective evidence regarding high levels of corruption in Nigeria, police services and judiciary and the evidence of lack of effective protection for witnesses and victims of crime, I find that the evidence before me is clear and convincing in demonstrating that adequate state protection or access to justice would not be available to you in Nigeria. 

 

[56] Therefore, the presumption of state protection has been rebutted. 

 

Internal Flight Alternative  

 

[57] I have also considered whether a viable internal flight alternative exists for you in Nigeria and I gave you a notice of Port Harcourt and Ibadan as proposed IFA locations at the beginning of the hearing today. 

 

[58] You testified that the agents of harm would be able to locate you by tracking you through your BVN number, which is bank verification number, or through your phone upon your landing in Nigeria. If not located then, you would be found as soon as you attempt to register yourself in the IFA location or make an attempt to find employment or rent. 

 

[59] Since I have already found you to be credible and found that you have established, on a balance of probabilities, that your agents of harm have the influence and capacity, I therefore find that they also have the means and motivation to pursue you anywhere across Nigeria. 

 

[60] Accordingly, I find that the IFA test fails on its first prong. 

 

[61] You cannot safely relocate to the proposed IFA location and therefore, there is no viable IFA location for you in Nigeria. 

 

CONCLUSION

 

[62] Based on my foregoing analysis, I conclude that you are a person in need of protection pursuant to section 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act and I therefore accept your claim. 

 

[63] My reasons are now concluded.

 

——— REASONS CONCLUDED ———