CAT/C/65/D/784/2016
complaints and interim measures, denied the request of the State party to lift the interim
measures.1 The complainant is represented by counsel, Mr. Zoheir Snasni.
Facts as presented by the complainant
2.1
In January 2009, after her studies, the complainant joined the local branch of the
Sunday Times, the English newspaper, in Lahore. 2 She worked in the newspaper as
Assistant Editor. Her responsibilities included reporting, editing and writing. 3 The
complainant worked on articles about topics such as women’s fashion, which were
illustrated with pictures of “western type” models. She asserts that the newspaper was
famous for being “too outspoken and liberal”, as extremists and the Taliban in Pakistan
have a very conservative idea about the position and role of women in society.
2.2
Because of her contribution to such articles and mostly because the complainant was
chosen to be the face of the newspaper in some events to increase the reputation of the
journal,4 she has become a target of the Taliban and other extremists. Although the threats
were not initially directed at her personally, other collaborators, including her supervisor,
Masuma Malhi, were implicated. The staff were asked by the newspaper’s management to
wear “eastern clothes” and to cover their faces when commuting to and from the office, and
they were accompanied by guards everywhere they went. 5
2.3
In August 2009, the complainant began to receive personalized threats. First, the
tyres of her car were slashed. Then, her driver received an envelope containing pictures of
her, disfigured with a red marker. The envelope also contained threats of an acid attack and
warnings that she won’t always be able to hide. The newspaper also often received different
kinds of threats. At the end of August 2009, the journal published an article regarding an
event held by a charity foundation; its founder was a progressive politician, who was hated
and sought after by the Taliban. Pictures of her along with that politician illustrated the
article. After the publication of that article, she received more threats, through text
messages and phone calls on her personal cell phone. She had to change her number twice
but to no avail. She was again threatened with being disfigured or being subjected to an
acid attack for “showing her face so brazenly to men”.
2.4
In January 2010, the threats against her intensified after the journal’s publication of
a scandalous picture 6 of a model taken during Karachi fashion week. She was followed
several times by strange men on bikes, and once, when stopped at a traffic light while in a
car driven by one of the newspaper’s guards, someone banged on the window and yelled at
her to get out. The complainant decided to leave the country since, by the end of 2009, her
parents had also begun to receive threats.
2.5 On 22 June 2010, she arrived in Canada with a student visa. Following her departure,
her parents frequently received phone calls asking where she was hiding. They even had to
move to Dubai for a while, as they were scared for their lives. 7 After that, her parents had to
move from time to time to avoid threats.
2.6
On 17 August 2012, she applied for asylum once her student visa expired. On 30
March 2016, the Refugee Protection Division of the Immigration and Refugee Board of
Canada rejected her claim for refugee protection.8 While not challenging the fact that she
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
2
The complainant currently resides in Canada. She asserts that her removal is “imminent”, without
indicating a date for her deportation.
The newspaper was owned by Mr Salmaan Tasseer, a politician who was the Governor of Pendjab at
the time.
She provided the Committee with attesting affidavits from her former supervisor.
Copies of some of the articles, along with pictures, have been provided to the Committee.
The complainant does not provide further details.
The complainant does not explain why the image has been perceived as scandalous.
Further information is contained in affidavits from her sister and her father, dated 3 March 2016,
provided as an annex to the complaint.
A copy of the notice to appear for a hearing is attached to the complaint. However, the complainant
has not provided a copy of the decision. The reason for the slow processing of her claim is not
explained. It is indicated that her claim for refugee protection was referred to the Refugee Protection
Division on 17 August 2012.
GE.19-05767