Citation: 2020 RLLR 2
Tribunal: Refugee Protection Division
Date of Decision: December 30, 2020
Panel: Marshall Schnapp
Counsel for the Claimant(s): Deryck Ramcharitar
Country: Tanzania
RPD Number: TB9-35424
Associated RPD Number(s): TB9-35456, TB9-35472
ATIP Number: A-2021-00540
ATIP Pages: 000015-000019
REASONS FOR DECISION
INTRODUCTION
[1] These are the reasons for the decision in the claims of [XXX] and his wife and child, who claim to be a citizens of Tanzania, and are claiming refugee protection pursuant to sections 96 and 97(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.
[2] These claims were heard jointly pursuant to Rule 55 of the Refugee Protection Division Rules. In addition, the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act requires the designation of a representative for all claimants less than 18 years of age. The tribunal designated [XXX] as representative for his minor child included in the claim, being [XXX].
ALLEGATIONS
[3] The claimants’ allegations are set out in a common Basis of Claim Form (BOC)1, The claimants’ allegations are that the principal claimant and his wife fear persecution by the government and others because of the principal claimant’s political opinion and involvement with ACT, a political opposition party.
[4] The principal claimant is a 47-year-old man. He stated in his BOC and his oral testimony that he fears he and his wife will be detained, tortured and killed at the hands of state authorities and other members of different political parties for his political opinion and involvement with ACT, a political party in opposition to the ruling party.
[5] Specifically, he stated how in 2007 when he was in hiding, his wife was attacked at their home when unknown people came looking for him. He also explained how his family had to move due to threats and from 2016 through 2019 he received threatening phone calls and messages to stop supporting ACT, an opposition party to the government. In 2019, [XXX] the associate claimant and brothers of the principal claimant also started receiving threatening text messages from unknown individuals warning them that the principal claimant should stop supporting ACT, the opposition political party
DETERMINATION
[6] The panel finds that the Claimants are Convention refugees pursuant to section 96 of the Act because they face a serious possibility of persecution by reason of the principal claimant’s political opinion.
ANALYSIS
[7] The determinative issue in this case is credibility.
Identity
[8] The panel finds the identity of all the claimants as nationals of Tanzania is established by their testimony and the supporting documentation filed including their passports.2
Credibility
[9] When claimants swear to the truth of certain allegations, this gives rise to a presumption that those allegations are true unless there is valid reason to doubt their truthfulness. The panel finds no valid reason to doubt the truthfulness of the claimants’ allegations, as found in their BOC.
[10] The panel accepts their narratives, and find, on a balance of probabilities, that their alleged fear of persecution is consistent with the objective evidence available about present conditions in Tanzania. Further, the claimants have corroborated their allegations through documentation, including copies of the principal claimants’ ACT membership documents, medical documentation, and supporting affidavits and letters from family members and individuals aware of the principal claimant’s political activities.3
[11] The panel finds the principal and associate claimants to be credible witnesses and therefore believe what they allege in support of their claims. They both testified in a straightforward manner and there were no relevant inconsistencies in their testimony or contradictions between the testimony and the other evidence before the panel which has not been satisfactorily explained.
[12] Having accepted the claimants to be credible, the panel accepts they have a subjective fear persecution by reason of political opinion.
Nexus
[13] There is a clear nexus between the claimants’ fear of persecution in Tanzania and the Convention ground of political opinion. Accordingly, the claims will be assessed under s. 96 of IRPA.
Objective fear
[14] The claimants subjective fear is well-founded. It accords with the National Documentation Package (NDP) version September 30, 2020. The documentary evidence before the panel indicates that the current regime has escalated a campaign of intimidation, violence and arrests against political opponents, activist, and others since 2015.4 There are reports of people who are critical of the government going missing, some have returned badly beaten and others have been killed and the ruling party using militias to engage in violence and intimidation around election time.5
[15] The panel finds that the minor claimant is also at risk by virtue of the principal claimant’s political opinion.
[16] Based on the evidence, the panel finds there is more than a mere possibility that the claimants will be persecuted if they return to Tanzania.
State Protection
[17] The panel find that it would be objectively unreasonable for the claimants to seek the protection of the state considering in their circumstances the state of Tanzania is the agent of persecution.
Internal Flight Alternative (IFA)
[18] The panel has considered whether a viable internal flight alternative exists for the claimants. Based on the evidence, the panel finds that there is a serious possibility of persecution throughout Tanzania because it is the government that the claimants fear.
CONCLUSION
[19] Based on the analysis above, the panel concludes that you are all Convention refugees. Accordingly, the panel accept your claims.
(signed) Marshall Schnapp
December 30, 2020
1 Exhibit 2.1, 2.2, 2.3,
2 Exhibit 1
3 Exhibit 7.
4 Exhibit 3, National Documentation Package (NDP), Tanzania, September 30, 2020.2.1
5 Exhibit 3, NDP, Item 2.1.