The High Court dismissed an application for leave to seek judicial review of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal’s rejection of a man’s subsidiary protection claim, finding that he had not shown substantial grounds to challenge its assessment of his religious conversion.
Mr Justice Richard Humphreys said the application was out of time. For the purpose of considering it, he proceeded on the assumption that time would be extended, but did not decide whether there were grounds to extend it.
The applicant, identified in the judgment as MHC, was born in 1984 and arrived in Ireland in 2006 on a student visa, which expired in February 2010. He was arrested in April 2010 as a person unlawfully in the State. He applied for asylum in May 2010 and said he had converted from Sunni Islam to Ahmadiyya Islam. His conversion certificate gave the date as 17 May 2010.
The asylum claim was refused. He applied for subsidiary protection in August 2012, and the tribunal rejected that application on 15 June 2016. He then brought the judicial review proceedings.
The court reviewed the decision-makers’ concerns about the timing and credibility of the claimed conversion. The judgment said the applicant had initially stated that he converted in 2009, before his arrest, but later said at interview that the conversion was on 17 May 2010, after his arrest. The tribunal also considered his delay in seeking asylum, his account of when he became aware of worsening conditions for Ahmadis, and his failure to recall the precise conversion date.
The applicant argued that the tribunal’s findings could be explained by confusion over dates in the interview record. His counsel also relied on supporting material from co-religionists. The judge said that material had been considered and noted that the applicant had not called those individuals to give evidence.
The court held that the adverse credibility finding was within the decision-makers’ jurisdiction. It said the judicial review court could not replace a decision-maker’s view with one more favourable to the applicant, and found no substantial grounds that the tribunal had acted unlawfully in considering and rejecting the claim.
The court dismissed the application for leave to apply for judicial review. It directed that the applicant be heard on any application for leave to appeal, if made on notice to the respondent, and that he serve the Chief State Solicitor’s Office with a copy of the judgment within seven days.