TC2-24914

RAD File / Dossier de la SAR : TC2-24914 Private Proceeding / Huis clos Reasons and Decision ? Motifs et décision Person who is the subject of the appeal XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX Personne en cause Date of decision January 31, 2023 Date de la décision Panel Tess Acton Tribunal Counsel for the person who is the subject of the appeal Raj Napal Conseil de la personne en cause Designated representative N/A Représentant(e) désigné(e) Counsel for the Minister N/A Conseil du ministre REASONS FOR DECISION OVERVIEW [1] XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX (Ms. XXXX) is a citizen of Jordan of Palestinian origin. She fears returning to Jordan because of her Palestinian background and as an older woman. The Refugee Protection Division (RPD) refused Ms. XXXX claim for protection. It found any harms Ms. XXXX may experience in Jordan do not amount to persecution. It also found she would not face a personalized risk to her life in Jordan. [2] Ms. XXXX appeals the RPD's decision. She does not submit new evidence and does not request an oral hearing. As I did not admit new evidence, the requirements to hold an oral hearing in subsection 110(6) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act1 are not met. [3] I dismiss the appeal. I find the RPD made mistakes in explaining its reasons for finding the harms and discrimination Ms. XXXX may experience in Jordan do not amount to persecution. However, I reach the same conclusion after an independent assessment. I also find Ms. XXXX does not face a likely risk to life, cruel and unusual treatment or punishment, or torture (section 97 harm) in Jordan. I therefore confirm the RPD's decision that Ms. XXXX is not a Convention2 refugee or a person in need of protection. [4] This is a difficult decision to make because as a person of Palestinian origin, Ms. XXXX has been displaced nearly her entire life. However, she has Jordanian citizenship and I must assess her claim as presented against Jordan. BACKGROUND ALLEGATIONS [5] In 1948, Ms. XXXX was just six months old when her family left Palestine because of the war. Her family departed Haifa and arrived in Lebanon. She lived in a refugee camp until she was six years old, and then lived with her extended family in an apartment. Her father worked in Qatar and then Bahrain, sending money to the family in Lebanon. She and her family experienced discrimination as Palestinian refugees in Lebanon. When she was nine years old, Ms. XXXX and her family joined her father in Bahrain. They returned to Lebanon after one year because her father lost his job. Ms. XXXX completed five years of formal schooling. When she was 13 years old, Ms. XXXX and her family moved to Kuwait. She worked for three years XXXX XXXX for schools. [6] In 1964, when she was 16 years old, Ms. XXXX married her husband. He and his family were also from Haifa and had also been forced to leave Palestine in 1948. They had resettled in Jordan and obtained Jordanian citizenship. Ms. XXXX obtained Jordanian citizenship through her husband. Ms. XXXX and her husband continued to live in Kuwait after their marriage. They had four children, who obtained Jordanian citizenship through their father. Ms. XXXX and her family experienced discrimination in Kuwait as foreigners and persons of Palestinian origin. [7] In 1990, Ms. XXXX was travelling with her husband in Turkey when the Gulf War started. They managed to return to Kuwait after a difficult journey by bus, plane, and taxi. Ms. XXXX lost a significant amount of weight and temporarily XXXX XXXX XXXX because of stress. Ms. XXXX and her family did not feel safe in Kuwait, given the conflict and their Palestinian origins, so returned to Jordan in 1990. [8] In Jordan, Ms. XXXX and her family lived in an apartment they owned in the XXXX area of Amman. She describes it as a middle-class area where there were many Palestinians. Ms. XXXX was a homemaker. The family experienced discrimination because of their Palestinian origins, even though they were Jordanian citizens. For example, they had to pay a large customs fee for re-entry to Jordan and her daughter faced different entry requirements to university. Her husband was not able to obtain work in government or big companies. Her sons were not able to obtain work in the military or police force. When they obtained work, they were paid less and worked in less favourable conditions. They had access to the public hospitals, but not the better hospitals for persons who work for the government, military, or police. The Jordanian government administered Ms. XXXX United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) pension and she alleges she received only a portion of what was owed to her. [9] Ms. XXXX husband became ill in 2009 and passed away in 2010. After his passing, Ms. XXXX lived in Jordan with her son until he immigrated to Canada in XXXX 2015. Ms. XXXX lived a short time on her own but did not feel safe. She did not feel safe going out alone because it is not normal for an older woman to be by herself in Jordan. She reports that at times her hydro or water was shut off to try to get her to come out of the house. She knew of a neighbour, also an older woman of Palestinian origin, whose house was robbed. Masked persons knocked at her door and she was scared they would attack her. This happened more than once. Ms. XXXX phoned the police, but they suggested she should not live alone or she should keep her doors closed. After these incidents, she lived with her daughter until she travelled to Canada in XXXX 2016. [10] Ms. XXXX has remained in Canada since entering in XXXX 2016. In around June 2016, she applied for permanent residence on humanitarian and compassionate grounds, which was refused. Ms. XXXX made a claim for protection in August 2020. None of her children currently live in Jordan. Ms. XXXX is Muslim and wears a hijab. She describes herself as moderate and does not believe in women covering their face. ANALYSIS [11] My role is to review whether the RPD made the correct decision. I will conduct an independent assessment of the evidence to decide the claim for protection.3 Discrimination does not amount to persecution [12] For the reasons below, after an independent assessment, I find Ms. XXXX does not face discrimination amounting to persecution. [13] Persecution is the "sustained or systemic violation of basic human rights demonstrative of a failure of state protection."4 Discrimination may amount to persecution in certain circumstances and the dividing line can be difficult to establish.5 The assessment must be done in the context of human rights law.6 The courts have given several important principles to consider in assessing whether discrimination amounts to persecution. Where individual incidents are discriminatory or constitute harassment, an analysis must be done as to whether the cumulative effect of discrimination amounts to persecution.7 In considering the country conditions, the person must establish some link to the country evidence.8 The consequences of the discrimination and the person's personal circumstances must also be considered.9 The cumulative impact of discriminatory treatment should be assessed with an intersectional approach.10 [14] I find the RPD made mistakes in assessing whether the harms Ms. XXXX may face in Jordan amount to persecution. For example, the RPD did not consider how the intersection of Ms. XXXX Palestinian origin and profile as an older women may affect her risk of discrimination or persecution. It also considered Ms. XXXX fears as an older woman as part of a section 97 assessment. It mischaracterized some of Ms. XXXX experiences and failed to properly consider them in its assessment. Overall, I find the RPD made mistakes in explaining its reasons for finding the harms and discrimination Ms. XXXX may experience in Jordan do not amount to persecution. For this reason, my assessment will not address each RPD finding. Instead, I set out my own framework of analysis and independently assess the personal evidence, country conditions, and submissions against the applicable legal standards. [15] I agree with my Refugee Appeal Division colleague11 that the following questions are useful to assess whether discrimination amounts to persecution: a. What allegations are credible? b. Are the credible allegations discriminatory or persecutory? c. What are the country conditions in Jordan and has Ms. XXXX demonstrated a connection between the country evidence and her situation? d. What are Ms. XXXX personal circumstances, and how do these impact her risk of discrimination or persecution? e. On the basis of these factors, does Ms. XXXX face systemic or persistent harm that leads to her facing an insecure future existence? [16] I will consider each question below. Credible allegations [17] I find Ms. XXXX has established her allegations, on a balance of probabilities. Her testimony was detailed and consistent with her Basis of Claim (BOC) form. Her supporting documents corroborate her allegations. I find the Minister's concerns in the intervention at the RPD do not undermine Ms. XXXX subjective fear. I accept her explanation that she only learned of the refugee process after her application to remain in Canada on humanitarian and compassionate grounds was refused and she exhausted her options to challenge the refusal. Although there is still around a one-year delay until she claimed protection, I accept Ms. XXXX explanation that the impacts of COVID-19 affected her ability to make her claim in as timely a manner as she wanted. [18] I therefore find Ms. XXXX has established the following allegations about her experiences in Jordan: a. Ms. XXXX and her family were required to pay a large customs fee on return to Jordan in 1990, which she attributes to their Palestinian origin. b. Her daughter experienced discrimination in her education. She had to repeat two years of her university in Jordan when the family returned from Kuwait. Jordanians who were not of Palestinian origin did not have to do this. c. Ms. XXXX husband was not able to obtain work in government or big companies, as these organizations discriminated against Palestinian-Jordanians. Similarly, Ms. XXXX sons were not able to obtain work in the military or police force. When they obtained work, they were paid less and worked in less favourable conditions. d. The Jordanian government administered Ms. XXXX UNRWA pension and she received only a portion of what was owed to her. e. Ms. XXXX had access to public hospitals, but not the better hospitals for persons who work for the government, military, or police. f. Ms. XXXX did not feel safe as an older woman living alone. She did not feel safe leaving her home alone because it is not normal for an older woman to be by herself in Jordan. She reports that at times her hydro or water was shut off to try to get her to come out of her house. g. In early 2016, masked persons knocked at Ms. XXXX door. This happened more than once. She was scared they would attack her. Ms. XXXX phoned police, but police suggested she should not live alone or she should keep her doors closed. [19] Based on these allegations, I find Ms. XXXX claim for protection has a nexus to the Convention grounds of nationality (Palestinian origins) and particular social group (both women and older women). I will consider these grounds and their intersection in my assessment. [20] Finally, to be clear, I find Ms. XXXX has credibly established all of her allegations set out in paragraphs five to ten above. However, for the purposes of this analysis, I set out my findings related to Ms. XXXX allegations against Jordan because that is her country of nationality. Credible allegations are discrimination and harassment [21] With the exceptions of the events outlined in the next paragraph, I find the allegations are acts of discrimination. Ms. XXXX and her family were treated differently by the state and society because of their Palestinian origins, even though they were Jordanian citizens. Ms. XXXX husband experienced discrimination in employment. Ms. XXXX children experienced discrimination in education and employment. Ms. XXXX personally experienced financial discrimination when she was forced to pay a large customs fee and in how her pension was administered. I find the police likely discriminated against Ms. XXXX when she phoned about the masked persons at her door. I also accept there is discrimination in the hospitals Ms. XXXX and her family were able access. [22] I agree with Ms. XXXX submission on appeal that the RPD mischaracterized the incidents of the masked persons knocking at Ms. XXXX door. The RPD writes, "certain strangers" once knocked at her door when she was alone and "annoyed" her."12 While Ms. XXXX initially used the word annoyed, she later clarified she was panicked and scared when these people knocked at her door.13 I accept her elaboration as it is consistent with her BOC. I also note her testimony was provided through an interpreter. [23] However, I do not agree with Ms. XXXX characterization of these incidents as attacks. I find the incidents of masked persons knocking at Ms. XXXX door are harassment. I accept this made Ms. XXXX feel scared and unsafe, in particular because of her neighbour's experience of robbery. I also find the incidents of turning off Ms. XXXX water and hydro to try to get her to come out of the house are harassment. For the purposes of my assessment, I find this harassment was likely because of Ms. XXXX Palestinian origins and/or her profile as an older woman. Country conditions in Jordan and Ms. XXXX situation [24] County evidence estimates that up to 70% of Jordan's population is of Palestinian descent.14 The majority of Palestinians in Jordan are citizens, like Ms. XXXX. Country evidence indicates Jordanians of Palestinians descent experience discrimination in public sector work, at public universities, and in political posts. This reduces their access to the long-term benefits connected to these positions, including free health insurance, cheaper consumer goods, subsidized housing and higher education, and social security.15 There is also disproportionate access to power and influence in Jordan, referred to as wasta. The country evidence indicates Palestinians in Jordan have little wasta when dealing with government bureaucracy, but more wasta in some industries.16 These conditions are consistent with Ms. XXXX husband and children's experiences in Jordan. However, these conditions are not directly linked to Ms. XXXX situation or her future situation. She did not lead evidence that she is seeking employment, education, or political positions. This discrimination against Palestinian-Jordanians in general does not result in the denial of a core human right for Ms. XXXX herself. [25] Apart from Palestinians living camps, the socio-economic situation of Jordanians of Palestinians descent is similar to other Jordanians.17 Palestinian-Jordanian citizens range from the very poor to the very rich.18 Ms. XXXX describes her family as living in a middle-class area of Amman where many Palestinian-Jordanians lived. They were able to own property, which Ms. XXXX sold after her husband's passing. Ms. XXXX was discriminated against in paying a customs fee in 1990 and in receiving her UNRWA pension. Her husband and children experienced discrimination in education and obtaining employment. However, I find the evidence does not establish this discrimination led to a denial of an adequate standard of living for Ms. XXXX. [26] Country evidence indicates Jordanians of Palestinian descent are entitled in law and practice to the same health benefits as other Jordanians.19 Their health outcomes are also similar to other Jordanians. However, other country evidence confirms Ms. XXXX testimony that Jordanians have access to better subsidized healthcare through their ability to obtain public sector work.20 Ms. XXXX describes that a public hospital she would access was very busy with long wait times, so she may need to resort to expensive private hospitals.21 However, the evidence does not establish that Ms. XXXX was denied access to healthcare or received inadequate medical treatment. [27] There is evidence of worse situations for Palestinians without Jordanian citizenship and Palestinians who hold Syrian citizenship. However, this is not Ms. XXXX situation. [28] Despite some recent legal reforms aimed at addressing gender inequality, women in Jordan face discrimination. Women under 40 years old are subject to personal status laws which govern marriage, parental authority, inheritance, and a system of male guardianship under which women's autonomy is closely controlled. Discrimination in the family, principally related to the legal framework for marriage, divorce, and inheritance which is based on sharia law, as the area of greatest inequality for women.22 Women cannot pass Jordanian citizenship to their children.23 Women have the right to vote, although social barriers lead to restricted civil liberties.24 Apart from inheritance laws, women and men have equal rights in Jordan regarding land and land assets. Women are underemployed in some professions.25 Certain social benefits in Jordan favour men over women.26 These are clear examples of official and intentional discrimination against women. However, Ms. XXXX has not led evidence or made submissions connecting these country conditions to her situation. I find there is not a serious possibility she would face this discrimination. [29] Violence against women is also prevalent in Jordan, in particular domestic and sexual violence.27 There has been an increase in domestic violence in recent years.28 "Honour"-based violence against women also occurs.29 Legal protections and accountability for these crimes are weak.30 However, Ms. XXXX has not led evidence or made submissions connecting these conditions to her situation. She does not indicate she fears returning to Jordan because of domestic, sexual, or "honour"-based violence. I find there is not a serious possibility she would face this violence. [30] Country evidence discloses challenges in accessing healthcare for older women who do not have documentation,31 but this is not Ms. XXXX situation. Country evidence also discloses the National Council for Family Affairs launched a strategy for the elderly in 2017 and implemented an executive plan from 2018 to 2022 with the National Committee for the Elderly. These initiatives aimed to improve services to the elderly, focusing on health, economic, environmental, and social matters.32 Overall, there is little country evidence in the record addressing the situation of older women in Jordan. I am mindful that information on gender-based violence, discrimination, and inequality may be incomplete or general in nature, especially for some groups.33 For this reason, I accept that Ms. XXXX may face the discrimination and harassment she established she experienced when she lived on her own. Personal circumstances and vulnerabilities [31] Ms. XXXX personal circumstances and vulnerabilities increase her risk of discrimination. She is a woman who would be returning to Jordan alone. She is also an older woman, soon to be 76 years old, who has lived most of her life with other family members. [32] The evidence does not establish Ms. XXXX health, ability, or finances would impact her risk of discrimination. Consideration of all these factors [33] When I consider Ms. XXXX experiences of discrimination and harassment, together with the country conditions and her personal circumstances, I find she does not face discrimination amounting to persecution. I find the discrimination and harassment she may face in Jordan because of her Palestinian origin and profile as an older woman do not cumulatively result in a sustained or systemic violation of her human rights. [34] Ms. XXXX experienced financial discrimination and her family members experienced discrimination in education and employment because of their Palestinian origin. There is some evidence of discrimination in access to healthcare for Jordanians of Palestinian origin. There is discrimination and violence against women in Jordan, although Ms. XXXX has not connected this to her own situation. When she lived on her own, Ms. XXXX has experienced some discrimination and harassment because of Palestinian origins and as an older woman. [35] However, when I consider the impacts of this discrimination and harassment, I find the consequences are not of a substantially prejudicial nature to amount to persecution. Considered cumulatively, the discrimination and harassment does not substantially interfere with Ms. XXXX right to an adequate standard of living, right to access healthcare, right to private and family life, right to access public spaces, or right to freedom of movement. I find the discrimination and harassment she may experience because of her Palestinian origin and profile as an older woman do not lead to an insecure future existence for Ms. XXXX. No likely section 97 harm [36] I also find Ms. XXXX has not established she faces a likely risk to life, cruel and unusual treatment or punishment, or torture in Jordan. The discrimination and harassment outlined above does not constitute a risk to her life, cruel and unusual treatment or punishment, or torture. [37] Ms. XXXX has also cited concerns with the security situation in Jordan. However, the evidence does not establish these risks are personal and specific to her. On these facts, I do not find Ms. XXXX would be subjected personally to any risks as required by section 97 of the IRPA.34 Considerations outside my jurisdiction [38] The record includes letters from some of Ms. XXXX family.35 The letters detail her close relationship with her children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren. They describe a vibrant woman who is active in her community, cares for others, and is an integral part of her family's lives. Considerations of establishment in Canada and the best interests of affected children are outside my jurisdiction, but I have compassion for Ms. XXXX situation. CONCLUSION [39] I dismiss the appeal. I confirm the decision of the RPD that Ms. XXXX is not a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection. (signed) Tess Acton Tess Acton January 31, 2023 Date 1 Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA), S.C. 2001, c. 27, subsection 110(6). 2 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, Geneva, 28 July 1951, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 189, at p. 137 and Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees, New York, 31 January 1967, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 606, at p. 267; accession of Canada to both on 4 June 1969. 3 Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v. Huruglica, 2016 FCA 93, [2016] 4 FCR 157; Rozas del Solar v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2018 FC 1145, [2019] 2 FCR 597. 4 Canada (AG) v. Ward, 1993 CanLII 105 (SCC), [1993] 2 S.C.R. 689, at p. 734. 5 Paul v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2022 FC 54, para. 31 6 Hathaway, James C. and Foster, Michelle. The Law of Refugee Status, 2nd Edition, Cambridge University Press, 2014, at pp. 193-194. 7 Canada (Citizenship and Immigration) v. Munderere, 2008 FCA 84; Mete v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration), 2005 FC 840. 8 Csonka v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2012 FC 1056 9 Tetik v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2009 FC 1240; Liang v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2008 FC 450 10 Gorzsas v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2009 FC 458; See also Guideline 4, para. 11.3.2 11 X (Re), 2020 CanLII 24189 (CA IRB). 12 RPD Record, at p. 14, para. 45; Appellant's Record, at p. 57, paras. 3 to 8. 13 RPD Hearing Transcript (May 26, 2022), at p. 27 14 National Documentation Package (NDP) for Jordan (December 21, 2022), item 13.1: Jordan. DFAT Thematic Report: Palestinians in Jordan and Lebanon, Australia. Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, para. 3.1. I have considered the most recent NDP for Jordan, as required by the Policy on National Documentation Packages in Refugee Determination Proceedings, effective June 5, 2019, available: https://irb.gc.ca/en/legal-policy/policies/Pages/national-documentation-packages.aspx. I did not disclose this updated NDP because the information is not different and does not show a change in the country conditions, see Lin v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2021 FC 380, para 26. 15 Ibid., item 3.3: Report on Citizenship Law: Jordan, European University Institute. Global Citizenship Observatory, at pp. 47-48, section 3.4.3.1; item 3.1: Law No. 6 of 1954 on Nationality (last amended 1987), Jordan, paras. 3.7 to 3.11, 3.49 to 3.61. 16 Ibid., item 13.1, paras. 3.12 to 3.16. 17 Ibid., item 13.1, paras. 3.7 to 3.16. 18 Ibid., item 13.1, paras. 3.7 to 3.11. 19 Ibid., item 13.1, paras. 3.55, 3.9. 20 Ibid., item 3.3, pp. 47-48, section 3.4.3.1. 21 RPD Hearing Transcript (May 26, 2022), at pp. 27-28. 22 Ibid, item 5.5: Jordan. Social Institutions and Gender Index 2019, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 23 Ibid. 24 Ibid. 25 Ibid. 26 Ibid., item 2.4: Jordan. Freedom in the World 2022, Freedom House. 27 Ibid., item 5.3: Concluding observations on the sixth periodic report of Jordan, United Nations. Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, at p. 8. 28 Ibid., item 2.3: Jordan. World Report 2022: Events of 2021, Human Rights Watch, at p. 3. 29 Ibid., item 2.1: Jordan. Country Reports on Human Rights Practices for 2021, States. Department of State, pp. 39-42. 30 Ibid., item 2.2: Jordan. Amnesty International Report 2021/22: The State of the World's Human Rights, Amnesty International, at p. 3. 31 Ibid., item 3.7: Securing Status: Syrian refugees and the documentation of legal status, identity, and family relationships in Jordan, Norwegian Refugee Council; International Human Rights Clinic, at pp. 27-28. 32 Ibid., item 2.5, at p. 8 33 Chairperson's Guideline 4: Gender Considerations in Proceedings Before the Immigration and Refugee Board, Guidelines issued by the Chairperson pursuant to paragraph 159(1)(h) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, Effective date: July 18, 2022, section 11.4. 34 IRPA, subsection 97(1); Guerrero v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2011 FC 1210, [2013] 3 FCR 20, at para. 27. 35 RPD Record, at pp. 194-204. --------------- ------------------------------------------------------------ --------------- RAD File / Dossier de la SAR : TC2-24914 RAD.25.02 (August 20, 2021) Disponible en français 2 Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada Refugee Appeal Division Commission de l'immigration et du statut de réfugié du Canada Section d'appel des réfugiés RAD.25.02 (August 20, 2021) Disponible en français