Citation: 2019 RLLR 22
Tribunal: Refugee Protection Division
Date of Decision: August 7, 2019
Panel: J. Bousfield
Counsel for the Claimant(s): Ardeshir H. Zarezadeh
Country: Iran
RPD Number: TB8-24144
Associated RPD Number(s): TB8-24188, TB8-24203, TB8-24203, TB8-24204
ATIP Number: A-2021-01124
ATIP Pages: 000145-000147
DECISION
[1] MEMBER: I’ve considered the testimony and evidence in this case and I’m rendering an oral decision. Written reasons will be provided.
[2] This is the decision in the claims for refugee protection of [XXX], [XXX], [XXX], and [XXX]. They claim to be citizens of Iran from Tehran. They’re claiming refugee protection under Section 96 and subsection 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
[3] The principal claimant was designated representative for the minor claimants.
[4] I’m satisfied that the claimants are citizens of Iran and as to their personal identity based on their passports which can be found in Exhibit 1.
[5] The details of the allegations appear in the answers to the principal claimant’s Basis of Claim Form which is Exhibit 2.1 and were elaborated upon by him in oral testimony during the hearing this morning. The central allegations of a much longer narrative are the following.
[6] The principal claimant made police complaints in regard to a business dispute with a well connected landlord. The landlord retaliated by using connections in the police and the courts to have the complaints dismissed. He then had the principal claimant arrested, detained, and accused of insulting the Iranian regime. The principal claimant therefore fled to Turkey in [XXX] 2017.
[7] Iranian authorities harassed and threatened the female claimant after the principal claimant went to Turkey. The claimants therefore fled to Canada on temporary residence visas in July 2018 and initiated these inland refugee protection claims a few weeks after their arrival.
[8] The claimants have been politically active against the Iranian regime while they’ve been in Canada. They fear political persecution if they return to Iran.
[9] For the following reasons I find that the claimants are Convention refugees.
[10] The affirmed testimony of refugee claimants is presumed to be true, unless it is internally inconsistent, inherently implausible, or contradicted by documentary evidence on country conditions. In this regard I am relying on the Federal Court of Appeal decision in Maldonado.
[11] For the most part there was no such fault with the principal claimant’s testimony. Furthermore, the allegations in the case are corroborated by a number of personal documents that I do not have sufficient to discount including probative photographs, a court order, a lease, and a statement from the principal claimant’s former business partner. These documents can be found in Exhibits 4 and 5.
[12] For all these reasons I find that the principal claimant is a credible witness and that the central allegations in this case are all true, on a balance of probabilities.
[13] The country documentary evidence before me indicates that peaceful political opposition to the Iranian Government and its policies and perceived opposition in this regard will attract a serious possibility of persecution by the government in Iran. The country documents in this regard can be found in Sections I, 2, 4, 5, 9, 10, and 12 of Exhibit 3 which is the National Documentation Package for Iran for March 29, 2019.
[14] Therefore, based on this country documentary evidence and the credible allegations, I find that the claimants have a well-founded fear of persecution in Iran by reason of their perceived antigovernment political opinion and/or their family relationship to the principal claimant.
[15] As the Government of Iran is an agent of persecution, I find that adequate State protection and viable internal flight alternatives are not available to the claimants.
[16] I therefore conclude that they’re Convention refugees. The … these claims are therefore accepted. This decision is concluded. Thank you for corning. Good morning.
[17] Thank you, Madam Interpreter.
[18] INTERPRETER: Thank you.
[19] CLAIMANT: Thank you.
———- REASONS CONCLUDED —