The High Court has rejected a Nigerian man’s challenge to a Refugee Appeals Tribunal decision recommending that he not be granted refugee status, finding that he had identified no substantial error of fact or law.
The judicial review concerned a Tribunal decision dated 10 November 2008. The applicant sought declarations and an order quashing it. In a judgment delivered on 30 September 2013, Ms Justice M. H. Clark dismissed the challenge.
The man said his asylum claim arose from his membership of Nigeria’s National Union of Road Transport Workers (NURTW). He claimed he was present during a violent dispute between that union and the Road Transport Employers Association of Nigeria, in which two people were killed. He said police arrested him with others, held and tortured him for four months, and that his life would be at risk if he returned to Nigeria. These were his claims, not findings by the court.
The Tribunal had made adverse credibility findings, citing, among other matters, the absence of identity documents or medical evidence, inconsistencies in his account, and his lack of knowledge of union affairs. The applicant argued that some findings were based on errors or speculation and that the Tribunal had misread his evidence. The respondents submitted that the adverse findings were clear and that he had not adequately explained why police would have targeted him.
The High Court said it would not reanalyse nuanced meanings in the applicant’s evidence against the Tribunal’s findings. It considered the lack of documents supporting his identity and claimed union role, his inability to identify the union chairman in Ogun State, and his failure to contact union colleagues or seek redress after his alleged detention. The judge also noted that he had spent two months in Lagos before travelling to Ireland, rather than leaving immediately after his alleged escape.
The court found no evidence that Nigerian authorities persecuted union members because of their membership or activities. It said the material instead described police investigations into the murder of the NURTW national leader and a violent dispute between rival unions. The court also said it could not identify from the papers or hearing what particular social group the applicant claimed to belong to, and expressed doubt that membership of a lawful trade union would meet the refugee-law criteria.
The court concluded that the Tribunal had given reasons for its credibility findings and that no substantial error of fact or law had been shown. The judicial review challenge therefore failed. The judgment does not grant or determine refugee status; it leaves the Tribunal’s challenged recommendation in place.