2023 RLLR 65

Citation: 2023 RLLR 65
Tribunal: Refugee Protection Division
Date of Decision: December 20, 2023
Panel: Josh Scheinert
Counsel for the Claimant(s): Howard C. Gilbert
Country: Slovakia
RPD Number: TC2-09599
Associated RPD Number(s): TC2-09601, TC2-12778
ATIP Number: A-2023-01721
ATIP Pages: N/A

DECISION

[1]       MEMBER:  This is the decision of XXXX XXXX, XXXX XXXX, and XXXX XXXX, File Numbers TC2-09599, TC2-09601, and TC2-12778.  I have considered the testimony and other evidence presented.  All claimants have alleged persecution based on their Roma nationality.  The claimant, XXXX XXXX, was declared a vulnerable person under Chairperson’s guideline 8 on account of him being XXXX XXXX XXXX, and later, evidence was put forward to further support this designation at Exhibit 7, noting that in addition to this, he suffers from some form of XXXX XXXX.  Elainea and Javeria, if you could interpret the following, and Nikole, if you could let Mr. XXXX know to turn the camera to his father?  Mr. XXXX, I just want to note on the record that special accommodations were made for you to be able to participate and follow today’s hearing and I want to thank you for participating in the hearing, and your testimony today was sincere and impactful.  And the Board thanks you for sharing your story.  Thank you.  Nikole, you can let them know we are finished.  And Elainea, that is it to you and Javeria.  Thank you.

[2]       INTERPRETER 3:  Do you want us to stay on or should we log out?

[3]       MEMBER:  No, no.  Everyone has to stay till the end.

[4]       INTERPRETER 3:  Oh!  We stay.  Stay.

[5]       MEMBER:  This will be a good decision transcript.

DETERMINATION

[6]       I have determined that you are all Convention refugees for the following reasons.

ALLEGATIONS

[7]       You are citizens of Slovakia.  You alleged, if you return, you will be harmed by the Slovak state and Slovak nationals on account of your Roma nationality.  You alleged there is no state protection or Internal Flight Alternative available to you.

Identity

[8]       You all confirmed your identities with your Slovak passports.

Nexus

[9]       There is a link between this claim and the Convention ground of nationality.  Therefore, I have assessed it under section 96.

Credibility

[10]     I found you all to be credible witnesses.  Your testimony was clear and consistent with the written narrative and evidence on file.  In addition to this consistent testimony, I also want to note all your testimony came across as sincere and it is very clear from the way and the manner in which you spoke that all of you are bothered and upset and hurt to the core by the experiences you endured in Slovakia.  You all established your Roma nationality.  You spoke about your Roma appearances, your Roma accents, being raised in the Roma tradition and Roma cultures and you were able to provide some information on what those cultures and traditions were.  In addition, you supported your Roma nationality with a letter at Exhibit 5.2 from the XXXX XXXX XXXX here in Toronto.

[11]     In addition to establishing your nationality, you established that you faced discrimination amounting to persecution on account of your nationality.  Each of you spoke in varying degrees of detail about lifelong discrimination, mistreatment, and marginalisation on account of your Roma nationality.  You spoke about issues related to housing, education, health care, and employment.  You were relegated to living in Roma settlements that lacked basic amenities including clean water and reliable electricity.  In the case of Mr. XXXX and Ms. XXXX, both of you were placed in schools meant for children with disabilities against yours and your family’s will.  This created the early point and the early foundation of discrimination and mistreatment that was built upon through each stage of your lives by the Slovak state and the communities that lived around you.  You discussed mistreatment in healthcare.  You discussed mistreatment in basic living when trying to go out and buy basic goods, of not being allowed into stores, of being fearful to walk in the city centre, and in the case of Mr. XXXX, of his not going alone to the city centre on account of fears of what might happen to him by his fears articulated by his son today, Mr. XXXX.

[12]     In addition to this treatment, this discrimination amounting to persecution, you established that you are also attacked and targeted physically and verbally because of your Roma nationality and that the police did not help you.  Mr. XXXX spoke of constantly being insulted, and I want to pause and note here that the insults and mistreatment he spoke about today were not only on account of his skin color, which, in the manner in which he testified, was meant to signify his Roma nationality, but also on account of his disability, being XXXX and XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX and XXXX XXXX.  Also, Mr. XXXX and Ms. XXXX established being called different names, being looked at differently, and in the case of Mr. XXXX and Mr. XXXX, of being violently attacked in the city centre and not being able to obtain help from police.  You spoke about skinheads marching through your neighbourhood annually and calling the police while you were barricaded and locked in your homes and the police not coming to help you.

[12]     You supported your testimony today with evidence at Exhibits 5.2 through 5.4 that not only establish your Roma heritage, but also are meant to establish the difficulties you faced in Slovakia, specifically the evidence at Exhibit 5.4, which notes your inability to acquire some of the documents you had wanted to establish elements of your upbringing.  Therefore, I find on a balance of probabilities that you are all credible.  You established your Roma nationality and you established you were targeted because of it.  Your subjective fear has been established.

Persecution

[13]     Objective country evidence supports your claims.  Roma in Slovakia face discrimination amounting to persecution.  Roma persons in Slovakia face violence, threats of violence, intimidation and harassment.  This includes actions by the police and violence and harassment from the police, and when not from the police directly, the police do not on the majority of occasions hold perpetrators accountable for targeting and mistreating the Roma.  There is also institutionalised discrimination by parliament and overt attempts to rebuff the raising of awareness of the situation of Roma in Slovakia.  Specifically, recently, parliamentarians in Slovakia objected to a report by the country’s ombudsperson that was meant to highlight the precarious situation Roma communities in Slovakia face.  Roma in Slovakia face discrimination in all facets of their life including housing, education, work, healthcare, and the provision of social services and this was reflected in your personal experiences noted in the section above.

[14]     I want to give just one example, one (1) statistic that I think highlights the situation and how dire it is, and that is that the life expectancy for Slovakia’s Roma is just under seven (7) years less than the rest of the population.  The result of all of this is that Roma in Slovakia find themselves marginalised and vulnerable.  Some examples, as already discussed but further elaborated on, include the illegal sterilisation of women without their consent, the relegation of Roma households to substandard living and housing, enrolling children in special schools, which I noted sows the seeds of discrimination and marginalisation from a young age, ensuring that each new generation finds itself once again relegated to the margins.  And here, I want to note that there have been some efforts to address the situation of schooling.  But even where courts have ordered certain schools to desegregate and educate Roma and non-Roma students together, those court rulings have not been adhered to.  I note the evidence in the National Documentation Package also notes that the situation is grim for persons with disabilities, such as Mr. XXXX.  They face similar challenges, though not necessarily as dire or precarious as Roma do.  And despite legislation meant to prohibit discrimination based on various factors including disability, many disabled persons in Slovakia find themselves facing discrimination.  These findings rely on NDP Items 2.1, 13.2, 13.4, 13.9 and 13.14.  Your country evidence at Exhibit 6 further supports these findings.

[15]     You provided a large number of articles that document the mistreatment, violence, and lack of accountability for violence directed at Roma people in Slovakia, and I note that the time periods of many of the articles you provided stretch back to over a decade showing that, over the past several years, the situation has not improved and that what was happening even before some efforts in Slovakia such as those by the ombudsperson to raise awareness and improve the situation of the Roma.  Despite those efforts, things have remained the same and not much has changed.  Therefore, based on the totality of the evidence, I find on a balance of probabilities your fear has an objective basis and is well-founded.

State Protection

[16]     I find state protection would not be available to you.  Slovakia is acting as the agent of persecution, and when it does not act as an agent of persecution itself, it has demonstrated it is unable or unwilling to provide protection to Roma citizens from those who target them.  On a balance of probabilities, the presumption of state protection is rebutted in this case.

Internal Flight Alternative

[17]     There is no viable IFA for you in Slovakia.  You face a serious possibility of persecution in all of Slovakia.  Therefore, I find on a balance of probabilities there is no IFA in Slovakia.

CONCLUSION

[18]     For all the reasons above and based on the totality of the evidence, I find you all to be Convention refugees.  You have a well-founded fear of persecution based on your Roma nationality.  Your claims are accepted.

——— REASONS CONCLUDED ———