The High Court has quashed a Refugee Appeals Tribunal decision concerning two children’s asylum claim, finding that the Tribunal had not sufficiently examined whether their family could avoid the alleged risk by relocating within Pakistan.
The applicants are minors born in Ireland in 2006 and 2008 to Pakistani parents. Their asylum claim was based on their parents’ circumstances. The parents said the mother’s family opposed her relationship with the father because he was from a lower social stratum. They described threats, including that the mother could be killed if her family found her. They left Pakistan for Ireland in 2005 after marrying. The judgment notes that country information confirmed honour killings of women in Pakistan.
The Tribunal had made adverse credibility comments about the father’s account, including his failure to mention certain events before the appeal hearing. It nevertheless considered whether the family could relocate to an urban area in Pakistan. The parents had told the Tribunal that the mother’s relatives lived in different cities and could locate them. The father also said he would be found in any province, while the Tribunal considered the size and population of Pakistan and the time since the parents had left.
The High Court held that the relocation assessment had to address two questions: whether there was a risk of persecution or serious harm in the proposed area, and, if not, whether it would be reasonable to expect the family to live there. The Tribunal had not identified a particular relocation area. The judge said the nature of the alleged threat—from family members rather than a regional conflict—called for a sufficiently careful inquiry into where the family could be safe.
The judge also found that the Tribunal had discounted the parents’ list of people said to be the mother’s relatives across Pakistan because it lacked corroboration. That was not enough to dismiss the possibility that her family was spread across urban areas. The Tribunal had also referred to the relatives actively seeking the parents, although the judge could not find that the parents had made that assertion. Country information indicated that freedom of movement in Pakistan was restricted in practice, a matter the relocation inquiry might also need to address.
The court did not decide the complaints about the Tribunal’s credibility findings. It granted orders of certiorari quashing the Tribunal’s decision and remitted the matter for a new determination. It did not determine the asylum claim or find that relocation was impossible.