The High Court has granted a Nigerian woman leave to seek judicial review of a decision refusing her refugee status, finding an arguable case that the Refugee Appeals Tribunal may not have considered her claim that she faced persecution because of political opinion imputed to her.
The ruling, delivered by Ms Justice Mary Irvine on 26 June 2009, does not quash the Tribunal’s decision or grant refugee status. It allows the woman to pursue the relief sought on two specified grounds.
The woman, identified in the judgment only as T.J., is from the Kalabari region of Rivers State. She said she fled after witnessing a village ritual and being told she would be sacrificed. Her account also referred to violence and arrests involving people believed to support a freedom fighter. She arrived in Ireland in October 2005 and applied for refugee status the next day.
The Refugee Applications Commissioner recommended refusing her claim, finding that her alleged fear arose from local villagers and that she had not established a well-founded fear of persecution under the Refugee Act. The Commissioner also found no indication that she would be singled out as a supporter of the freedom fighter and considered State protection and relocation available. The Refugee Appeals Tribunal affirmed that recommendation in April 2007.
On appeal, her representatives argued that she could be viewed as a supporter because she came from the Kalabari region and could face danger from a government-backed group. They also relied on country of origin material and previous Tribunal decisions. The woman’s initial questionnaire and interview had not clearly advanced a political-opinion claim, a point her counsel acknowledged.
Justice Irvine said it was arguable that the Tribunal member failed to consider that claim and the related country material. She was not satisfied that the Tribunal’s report showed the member had addressed the political-opinion ground before dismissing the country information as irrelevant. The court also found a reasonable case that a standard paragraph in the decision claiming to have considered all documents did not, by itself, resolve the issue.
The court rejected the other challenges described in the judgment. It said the Tribunal’s adverse credibility finding about the alleged ritual was open to it, and therefore the Tribunal did not have to decide whether the woman belonged to a particular social group. The court also found no reasonable case that the statutory declaration of age undermined the Tribunal’s finding that she was undocumented or materially affected its decision.
The order grants leave to seek judicial review on the grounds concerning the political-opinion claim and related country information. The judgment does not determine the final outcome of that review.