The High Court has refused a Nigerian man’s application for judicial review of a decision affirming the recommendation that he not be declared a refugee. The court found no substantial grounds to conclude that the Refugee Appeals Tribunal’s decision was legally flawed, unreasonable or irrational.
The case was heard on 1 March 2013 as a “telescoped hearing”: the parties asked the court to hear the full judicial review application if it granted leave during the same hearing. The court considered the substantive challenge and refused the application on all grounds. The judgment, delivered by Mr Justice McDermott on 6 March 2013, concerned the Tribunal’s decision of 22 December 2008, notified to the applicant by letter dated 12 January 2009.
The applicant said that after his father died, members of the Ogboni Society threatened him over the burial and demanded two human heads. He said he feared they would kill him, went to police but received no help, and later left Nigeria. He also described being helped by an unnamed uniformed man at Lagos airport, who supplied a forged Portuguese passport and arranged travel to Ireland. These were the applicant’s account of events; the Tribunal found his claim lacked credibility.
The High Court held that the Tribunal’s assessment did not rest solely on a brief comment about the applicant’s demeanour. It also relied on what it considered gaps and implausibilities in his account, including the lack of detail about his travel arrangements and his arrival and stay in Dublin. The court found that the country information before the Tribunal did not support the alleged burial ritual involving human heads, and that the Tribunal had fairly considered the material submitted.
The applicant argued that he had not been given an opportunity to address concerns about how he left Lagos and passed through immigration. The court rejected that complaint, finding that the airport issues were raised at the Tribunal hearing and that submissions were invited. It also upheld the Tribunal’s conclusion that internal relocation was a reasonable consideration, noting the applicant’s evidence that he had lived in Lagos for two months without trouble.
The ruling concerns the legality of the Tribunal’s decision. The High Court refused judicial review; it did not itself make a fresh determination of refugee status.