TC0-01136

TC0-01136

The RPD erred on the first prong of the IFA test by failing to consider all evidence of the persecutor's nationwide influence and family/security service contacts in Abuja; given the retired police superintendent's status, evidence of family in Abuja (including an SSS cousin), rapid spread of rumours, prior attempts to locate the Appellants and ongoing threats, there is a serious possibility the Appellants would be located and persecuted in Abuja and state protection is unlikely; therefore Abuja is not a viable IFA and the appeal is allowed with substitution finding the Appellants are Convention refugees.

Citation
TC0-01136
Parties
Principal Appellant: XXXX XXXX; Associate Appellant: XXXX XXXX XXXX; Minor Appellants: XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Appeal Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
26 January 2021
Procedural Posture
Refugee Appeal / Decision on Appeal (substitution Under S.111(1)(b) Irpa)
Outcome
Appeal allowed; substituted decision that the Appellants are Convention refugees
Legal Topics
Internal Flight Alternative, State Protection, Female Genital Mutilation, Persecution, Particular Social Group, Standard of Review
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Internal Flight Alternative State Protection Female Genital Mutilation Persecution Particular Social Group +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Principal Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Associate Appellant

XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Appellants

Procedural Posture

Refugee Appeal / Decision on Appeal (substitution Under S.111(1)(b) Irpa)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Viability of internal flight alternative (Abuja)
  2. 2 Availability of state protection against private actors
  3. 3 Risk of female genital mutilation to minor daughters

Ratio Decidendi

The RPD erred on the first prong of the IFA test by failing to consider all evidence of the persecutor's nationwide influence and family/security service contacts in Abuja; given the retired police superintendent's status, evidence of family in Abuja (including an SSS cousin), rapid spread of rumours, prior attempts to locate the Appellants and ongoing threats, there is a serious possibility the Appellants would be located and persecuted in Abuja and state protection is unlikely; therefore Abuja is not a viable IFA and the appeal is allowed with substitution finding the Appellants are Convention refugees.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; substituted decision that the Appellants are Convention refugees

Orders

  • Appeal allowed
  • Substituted decision pursuant to paragraph 111(1)(b) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act that the Appellants are Convention refugees