What is a well-founded fear of persecution in gender-related refugee claims?

September 9, 2015 · 3:55 pmImmigration
What is a well-founded fear of persecution in gender-related refugee claims?

Women can suffer from persecution because of their sex. Each country has specific laws related to women in terms of how women should be treated by men. The laws are sometimes based on traditions and culture in that particular country. The law of genital mutilation for example is persecutory in itself. The international human rights law and criminal law condemns such practices that directly violate women’s rights to choice and liberty. Yet, each refugee claimant has to prove at the Canadian refugee division that they are persecuted in their countries. They have to prove that they are subjected personally to barbarian practices. Some countries have prohibition in practicing traditions where women are violated, however if a state is unable to stop the implementation of cultural practices that cause violence and abuse then international law must protect those claimants in Canada. For instance, in Israel, a country that I have expertise as counsel in, the state doesn’t have laws encouraging domestic violence against women, nevertheless the cultural perception of a woman is that she has to be submitted to her man allowing domestic violence to flourish.

The state of Israel recognizes a lack of proper training within the police force and many police officers when dealing with domestic violence cases advise women not to provoke their men, some of which are clearly sympathetic to men who “discipline” their wives. If a woman who is a refugee claimant proves that her complaints to police were turned a blind eye upon, her claim may be well-founded. It is of course hard to prove an officer’s indifference in handling domestic violence cases, but an experienced counsel may find circumstantial evidence in addition to material evidence to prove that a woman’s claim was overlooked or abandoned. For example, I had a case where a woman complained several times to police authorities, she had material proof that her claim was taken into consideration, yet she didn’t have a clear letter from police refusing her claim. She also did not have a letter stating that her claim was processed and taken into courts. I examined her case carefully and through a series of questions she confessed that after her fifth complaint, she was invited into the police department and had a private conversation with an official. This official orally advised her that her husband wouldn’t be touched by the police because he was a respectable member of the small local community. My client was also advised by the official to try to please her husband in order to prevent further violence. We described the circumstances of her visit to the police officer in detail in her basis of claim form and allowed her to make an oral testimony before the refugee division. The claimant explained in detail how she met the officer, the day of her meeting, she recalled his name, and that she recognized him as one of the guests in her home. Her overall testimony was plausible and therefore credible in the eyes of the panel.

Some laws, as a reflection of specific traditions and culture, do not have to conform to international laws. However if the penalty for non compliance to such laws is disproportionally severe, it can be amounted to persecution. Examples of such laws are forced abortions and sterilizations because they breach fundamental human rights law to life and liberty. Again, a particular claimant has to prove on a balance of probability that they were personally subjected to those laws.

What is a well-founded fear of persecution in a gender-related claim?

To be a Convention refugee, a claimant must show a well-founded fear of persecution — both a genuine subjective fear and an objective basis for it — on a protected ground. Gender-related claims (for example gender-based violence or persecution for defying gender norms) are recognized, often under the “particular social group” ground.

ElementWhat it means
Subjective fearThe claimant genuinely fears harm
Objective basisCountry evidence supports that fear
Protected groundRace, religion, nationality, political opinion, or particular social group
State cannot / will not protectNo adequate state protection available

State protection: where gender claims are usually decided

In practice, most gender-related claims do not fail because the member disbelieves the harm — they fail on state protection and internal flight. Canada presumes a state can protect its own citizens, and the claimant must rebut that with clear and convincing evidence. Showing that laws exist on paper is not enough for the Minister either: what matters is whether protection is adequate in practice. Police reports that led nowhere, documented refusals to intervene in "family matters", and country reports describing systemic non-enforcement are what rebut the presumption. Expect to be asked, too, whether you could safely relocate within your own country — and to be ready to explain why you could not.

Preparing testimony about trauma

The Chairperson's Guideline recognizes that trauma affects how people recall and describe events, and that hesitation or gaps are not automatically signs of untruthfulness. That protection has to be invoked, not assumed. A psychological or medical report explaining the effect on memory and disclosure, a request for accommodations such as a female member or interpreter, and careful preparation so the account is consistent with your Basis of Claim all matter. Inconsistency with your own earlier statements remains the most common reason for a negative credibility finding.

If the claim is refused

A negative decision is not always the end. Most refused claimants can appeal to the Refugee Appeal Division, which reviews the RPD's reasoning and can accept new evidence in limited circumstances. Beyond that there is judicial review in the Federal Court, and — where removal becomes imminent — a Pre-Removal Risk Assessment based on new risk that arose after the refusal, or a request for a stay of removal. Each has short deadlines, so get advice the week the decision arrives rather than after.

Gender-related claims require careful, sensitive preparation. Angelina Shuster represents clients at refugee claim hearings before the Refugee Protection Division, and on removal, appeal and humanitarian and compassionate matters — see all practice areas or request a free assessment.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

Are gender-based refugee claims accepted in Canada?

Yes. Canada recognizes gender-related persecution — such as gender-based violence, or persecution for defying gender norms — as a basis for refugee protection, often under the “particular social group” ground, when the claimant shows a well-founded fear and inadequate state protection.

What does "well-founded fear of persecution" mean?

It means the claimant genuinely fears persecution (the subjective element) and that fear has a real, evidence-based foundation (the objective element), on a protected ground, in a country whose state cannot or will not provide adequate protection. Both elements must be established.

Official resources

External links are provided for general information only and are not legal advice.

Angelina Shuster — Licensed Paralegal, Karb Law
Written by

Angelina Shuster

Licensed Paralegal · Law Society of Ontario

Angelina Shuster is a paralegal licensed by the Law Society of Ontario with 25 years of experience in Canada. Based at Karb Law’s office in Richmond Hill, she represents clients across Ontario and in immigration matters throughout Canada, and has helped thousands of people with immigration and legal matters — refugee claims, appeals, admissibility and detention reviews before the Immigration and Refugee Board, and summary-conviction criminal matters.

About Angelina Shuster & her credentials →
Keep Reading

Related Articles

Request a Consultation

Fill out the form below and our legal team will get back to you shortly.

Contact us

Google Google Rating
4.7★★★★★Based on 24 reviews
Google
Google Rating
4.7★★★★★
Based on 24 reviews