2024 RLLR 91

Citation: 2024 RLLR 91
Tribunal: Refugee Protection Division
Date of Decision: June 12, 2024
Panel: Avril Cardoso
Counsel for the Claimant(s): M. Mary Akhbari
Country: Colombia
RPD Number: TC2-14714
Associated RPD Number(s): N/A
ATIP Number: A-2025-00611
ATIP Pages: N/A

DECISION

[1]      MEMBER: This is the decision of the Refugee Protection Division in the claim of XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX, a citizen of Colombia. You are claiming refugee protection pursuant to sections 96 and 97 of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

DETERMINATION

[2] In coming to my decision I’ve considered the Chairperson’s gender guidelines. I find that you are a Convention refugee for the reasons which follow.

ALLEGATIONS

[3] To briefly summarize your allegations you allege you’ve been threatened and assaulted by members of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia or FARC. You seek Canada’s protection.

Identity

[4] I find that you have established your personal and national identity as a citizen of Colombia through your testimony and your passport which can be found in Exhibit 1 (sic).

Nexus

[5] I find there is a link between what you fear and the Convention grounds of political opinion and particular social group of women fearing gender based violence and your claim is therefore assessed under section 96.

[6] After a peace agreement was signed with FARC in November 2016 it has become a political party. This is in 7.22. Tension between the Colombian government and FARC is reported since the signing of the peace accords in 2016. This is in 7.48. It is also reported that FARC, at least theoretically, these elicit business as a way to support its political crusade. This is in 7.50.

[7] Therefore the threats and assault against you and your family have a connection with political opinion as you oppose the actions of FARC when they killed your uncle and your actions can be considered as political opinion against FARC.

[8] You also testified that you believe you were targeted because FARC mistakenly believed that you were in a relationship with your uncle as you spent a great deal of time together and were very close in age. I also note that during one of their assaults they took a lock of your hair. These facts also demonstrate a connection to your gender which also brings your claim within the ambit of the Convention based on particular social group of women fearing violence.

Credibility

[9] I found you to be a credible witness and I therefore believe what you’ve alleged in support of your claim. Your narrative was very detailed and particularized, it was supported by substantial amount of corroborative evidence which was materially consistent with your story. You also declared that your updated narrative was complete and true. Based on the testimony you have provided I found no reason to doubt your truthfulness.

[10] I asked you questions about various parts of your narrative in a non-consecutive way and your responses were detailed and you provided specific information that is reasonable to know given the interactions you had with the agent of persecution.

[11] I find that your uncle was assaulted by members of FARC in XXXX 2020 and subsequently died. You provided his death certificate and other evidence which confirms his death. This can be found in Exhibit 11. I find that you have been threatened and assaulted by the agent of persecution on multiple occasions including your paper threat on XXXX XXXX, 2020 and assaults in XXXX 2021 and XXXX 2020 – 22.

[12] To conduct a trauma informed proceeding I did not ask you to recount the assaults. You provided testimony about the reason you believe you were specifically targeted and you explained why you believed you were assaulted by the same assailants in XXXX 2021 and XXXX 2022. You provided a detailed chronology of the threats that you experienced. You also submitted statements from family members who left your country because of threats from FARC. You also submitted a statement from the friend who helped you after the assault in XXXX 2021. These are contained in Exhibit 11.

[13] Your explanation for failing to seek protection in the United States is credible. You testified that being detained and treated badly by the immigration officers elevated the trauma you experienced in your country and you did not want to seek protection in that country. I note that you promptly came to Canada after you were released where you have family and sought protection. I therefore find that your subjective fear is established by your credible testimony and supporting documents.

Objective Basis

[14] Your fear of being deported to your country in the present circumstances is a fear that is well-founded in the objective documents. About 1,100 FARC members rejected the peace agreement and formed breakaway groups. FARC dissidents engage in drug trafficking and carry out violent attacks. This is in 7.22.

[15] It is reported that thousands of members from across the FARC’s ranks have abandoned the peace process to return to illegal activities. August 2019 marked a turning point for ex FARC dissidents who announced that the group would embrace the legacy of FARC and referred to the peace agreement as treasonist. This small group of FARC fighters dissatisfied with the peace process moved into a criminal threat with transnational reach. The group has also created alliances with other criminal groups. This is in 7.30.

[16] The main targeted profiles of FARC-EP include social leaders who denounce the presence of armed groups, indigenous and Afro Colombian leaders, perpetrators of (inaudible) held accountable. This is in 1.8.

[17] Violence against crime (inaudible) witness is not decreased. There is a lack of effective witness protection in Colombia. This is in 1.24.

State Protection

[18] I’ve considered whether state protection would be available to you if you return to your country and have concluded that it is not. You and your family have filed complaints with the authorities without meaningful protection. These include a complaint filed by your uncle’s mother, your uncle’s brother, V, your parents and your own complaints. You said you were never offered protection and the authorities did not do anything.

[19] There were hearings regarding your uncle’s murder and two (2) people were charged. You testified that these are still underway and you hope that your uncle receives justice for his murder which you remain sceptical because of the high level of corruption in your country and the infiltration of FARC in many parts of the state. Efforts by authorities to provide protection to social leaders and human rights advocates has been limited. This is an 1.8.

[20] Colombia has taken a hard line on organized crime and successfully scaled back the power of organized criminal groups. Significant work remains to be done, state efforts have not been able to prevent the expansion of these groups and associated violence.

[21] There are reports of collusion between state authorities and criminal armed groups such as the system has a lack of resources and there are high levels of corruption and high level levels of impunity. Widespread corruption is one of the greatest obstacles to effective law enforcement. Local prosecutors frequently do not advanced cases against armed groups but focus on crime such as theft or family violence. One of the key problems with the criminal justice system is a lack of effective investigations of crimes. This is an 1.24.

[22] According to the US Department of State report among human rights issues are serious government corruption. Some members of the FARC who participate in the peace process allege the government had not fully complied with its commitments such as ensuring the security of demobilized former combatants and facilitating their reintegration, gender based violence as well as impunity of perpetrators was a problem. The government did not enforce existing laws effectively. This is in 2.1.

[23] Colombia is among the longest standing democracies in Latin America but one with a history of widespread violence and serious human rights abuses. The government announced a ceasefire with armed groups including the FARC dissidents. This is in 2.6.

[24] There is clear and convincing evidence before me that the state is unable or unwilling to protect you. Your experiences seeking state protection are consistent with the objective evidence which indicates it is lacking due to corruption, collusion, lack of effective investigations and ineffective state efforts to curtail the activities of criminal groups including FARC.

Internal Flight Alternative or IFA

[25] I’ve also considered whether a viable IFA exists for you. I proposed Barranquilla as a possible IFA location. An IFA must be safe and reasonable. You are a 20-year-old woman, you are currently in a relationship and are pregnant. You have a XXXX XXXX level of education. I find that the test fails on the first prong as it is conjunctive. It is unnecessary to consider the second prong.

[26] It is reported that gender based violence is widespread in Colombia. There are high rates of femicide and sexual violence. This is in 5.4.

[27] Criminal groups target those they perceive as an annoyance or obstacle. Criminal groups are definitely able to track targeted individuals. The main method is word-of-mouth and contact in intelligence agencies as well as networks with other criminal groups. This is in 7.37.

[28] I find that the agent of persecution has the means and motivation to locate you in Barranquilla. You testified that they would certainly retaliate against you and even your child because they want revenge for the arrest of two (2) of their members.

[29] You testified that they could find you as you would have to change your identity documents to seek medical care during your pregnancy and find a home. FARC has a national reach. As the trial is ongoing for the two FARC members charged with your uncle’s murder this elevates the attention you are likely to receive for retaliation and revenge.

[30] I find on a balance of probabilities that there is a serious possibility of persecution in Barranquilla and there is no viable IFA available to you.

CONCLUSION

[31] Based on the totality of the evidence I find you to be a Convention refugee and I accept your claim.

 

——— REASONS CONCLUDED ———