2024 RLLR 125

Citation: 2024 RLLR 125
Tribunal: Refugee Protection Division
Date of Decision: June 18, 2024
Panel: Louis Gentile
Counsel for the Claimant(s): Alfonso Mejia Arias
Country: Mexico
RPD Number: TC1-06628
Associated RPD Number(s): N/A
ATIP Number: A-2025-00724
ATIP Pages: N/A

DECISION

[1] MEMBER: This is the decision for the following claimant, XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, file number TC1-06628. I have considered your testimony and the other evidence in the case and I’m ready to render my decision orally. In reaching this decision the Panel has considered Chairperson’s Guideline 4: Gender Considerations in Proceedings Before the Immigration and Refugee Board.

[2] You are claiming to be a citizen of Mexico and are claiming refugee protection pursuant to sections 96 and 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

DETERMINATION

[3] I find that you are a Convention refugee because you face a serious possibility of persecution for the following reasons.

ALLEGATIONS

[4] You allege the following. You are a citizen of Mexico and no other country. You met your ex-partner, CNG, in Toronto while you were studying XXXX. After some time he began to physically, emotionally and sexually assault you. After being in a relationship for some months he revealed to you in confidence that he was a member of the Los Zetos Cartel.

[5] You tried to end your relationship and you returned to Mexico alone in 2019 to try to escape from him after he had assaulted you again however even though you changed your phone number and moved away from your home in XXXX you learned that CNG was still looking for you.

[6] You knew that he could find you anywhere in Mexico with his cartel connections so you fled back to Canada and sought help and advice at a community centre.

[7] If you return to Mexico you could be subjected to kidnapping, enforced disappearance, sexual and gender based violence or murder by your ex-partner. You believe that in Mexico you would not receive adequate protection from the police who do not adequately protect women victims of violence.

[8] You allege that there is no state protection for you in Mexico where many similarly situated individuals have been killed and where feminicide is rampant nor is there any internal flight alternative.

Identity

[9] Your personal identity as a citizen of Mexico has been established by your testimony and the supporting documents filed in the exhibits including a certified true copy of your Mexican passport. I therefore find on a balance of probabilities that identity and country of nationality have been established.

Nexus to Section 96 or Section 97

[10] I find that there is a link between what you fear and one of the five Convention grounds, specifically your membership of a particular social group as a single woman therefore this claim has been assessed under section 96.

Credibility

[11] In terms of your general credibility I find you to be a credible witness and I therefore accept on a balance of probabilities what you have alleged in your oral testimony and in your Basis of Claim form. Your testimony is presumed to be true. You testified in detail and consistently with your Basis of Claim about how you suffered from your ex-partner and about the threats you received from him should you return to Mexico.

[12] In support of your claim you provided documents at Exhibit 6 that include an article about the arrest of your agent of persecution in 2014 for violent acts and a letter from your friend confirming the threats against him if he didn’t break contact with you.

[13] The Panel finds these documents to be consistent with your testimony and credible on a balance of probabilities and thus assigns them significant weight.

[14] Your testimony was in keeping with your Basis of Claim form and there were no significant inconsistencies or omissions and your testimony about why you could not count on adequate state or police protection anywhere in Mexico was also persuasive.

[15] In reaching these findings the Panel has considered and applied Chairperson’s Guideline 4: Gender Considerations in Proceedings Before the IRB, particularly sections 6, 7 and 8. I therefore believe what you have alleged in support of your claim and I find the following to be credible, that on a balance of probabilities you are a single woman fearing abuse from a highly motivated cartel connected ex-partner.

[16] You have established your subjective fear of persecution including fear of being subjected to sexual and gender based violence, disappeared, tortured or murdered.

Persecution Risk

[17] The objective documentation supports your allegations that individuals in your circumstance face persecution.

[18] One, state and municipal laws addressing domestic violence largely fail to meet the required federal standards and often were unenforced. According to an INEGI 2021 survey 40 percent of women aged 15 and older reported having experienced physical violence at the hands of their current or most recent partner and 23 percent reporting having experienced sexual violence in the last 12 months. NDP 2.1.23, page 26.

[19] Two (2), the documentary evidence indicates that impunity and extremely low rates of prosecution remained a problem for all crimes including human rights abuses and corruption. There were reports some government agents were complicit with international criminal gangs. NDP 2.1.23, page 2.

[20] Three (3), the documentary evidence indicates feminicide is rampant in Mexico and there were serious flaws in the investigation of these crimes. NDP 2.1.23, page 3.

[21] Four (4), the documentary evidence indicates that human rights organizations asserted authorities at times, did not take seriously reports of rape and victims were socially stigmatized and ostracized. NDP 5.3, page 17.

[22] Five (5), the documentary evidence indicates that the Mexican police and security forces have been hobbled by corruption for decades and that this corruption underpins collusion with criminals. NDP 10.2.

[23] Six (6), Mexico is plagued by thousands of missing persons and enforced disappearances annually and impunity largely prevailed on this issue. NDP 2.1.23, pages 3 to 5.

[24] Seven (7), the majority of separated or divorced women, 77.7 percent, have been subjected to attacks of all kinds by their former partners or spouses mainly to acts of physical and/or sexual violence together with one of the other types of violence, 44 – 45.4 percent. NDP 5.3, page 13.

[25] Eight (8), more aggressive than other groups Los Zetos maintain control of territory by publicly displaying and posting on social media mutilated bodies to intimidate Mexican security forces, the local citizenry and rival organizations. NDP 7.2, page 32.

[26] Nine (9), an independent consultant who focusses on security, crime prevention and information systems in Mexico stated that Los Zetos is capable of tracking down enemies, defectors and people of specific interest including people fleeing to other states and cities using different methods ranging from direct tracking to information provided by corrupt authorities.

[27] The associate professor also noted that, “anyone can be found anywhere” through family, friends and social media as well as information from telephone companies and government and law enforcement databases. According to the independent researcher Los Zetos uses satellites, antennas, communication networks and GPS as well as taxi drivers as informal informants. RAR MEX 2009 68-.e 25 March 2022.

[28] Your counsel also submitted in Exhibit 7 additional credible evidence describing the plague of domestic violence and feminicide in Mexico as well as articles explaining how technology in Mexico makes it easy to find someone anywhere in the country. Consequently I find that there is a serious possibility that you could face murder and/or targeted gender-based violence should you return to Mexico. I find that you have established an objective basis for your subjective fear and therefore you have a well-founded fear of persecution.

State Protection

[29] I find that adequate state protection would not be available to you were you to seek it in Mexico. The objective documentary evidence outlined above indicates that police another state entities do not effectively enforce domestic violence or sexual and gender based violence laws and that femicide is at epidemic levels and often takes place with impunity. Furthermore the police are corrupt and sometimes work in collusion with criminal cartels.

[30] States are presumed to be capable of protecting their citizens except in situations where the state is in a complete breakdown. However based on the claimant’s personal circumstances as well as the country documentation referred to above the Panel finds on a balance of probabilities that the claimant has rebutted the presumption of state protection with clear and convincing evidence. Adequate state protection is not available to her as she fears persecution from a highly motivated ex-partner in a country where impunity for domestic violence and feminicide is all too common.

Internal Flight Alternative

[31] I have also considered whether a viable internal flight alternative exists for you, particularly in Oaxaca. The country documentation referred to above indicates that the situation for individuals in circumstances such as yours is the same throughout the country and that you would face a serious possibility of persecution or risk to life anywhere in Mexico as a motivated cartel connected ex-partner with police links could on a balance of probabilities find you anywhere in Mexico.

[32] The Panel finds on a balance of probabilities that there is a serious possibility of persecution of the claimant anywhere in Mexico including Oaxaca as the security forces are corrupt and vulnerable to bribery and this would make starting a new life safely and undiscovered by your ex-partner elsewhere in Mexico nearly impossible, especially given his cartel connections.

[33] As such I find that the IFA test fails on the first prong and there is no viable internal flight alternative for you in Mexico.

CONCLUSION

[34] Based on the totality of the evidence I find the claimant to be a Convention refugee as she faces a serious possibility of persecution because of her membership of a particular social group as a single woman. Your claim is therefore accepted.

——— REASONS CONCLUDED ———