The High Court has quashed a deportation order and the part of its analysis dealing with refoulement, directing the Minister for Justice and Equality to reconsider that issue. The court dismissed the rest of the proceedings, including the challenge to the refusal of subsidiary protection.
The applicant, identified as M.A.C. (Pakistan), sought judicial review of the subsidiary protection refusal and deportation order. He said he had been threatened because he was a Shia Muslim and that police protection was inadequate. His asylum and appeal applications were rejected primarily on credibility grounds. A subsidiary protection application was refused on 18 April 2012, and a deportation order followed on 9 May 2012.
The applicant argued that the Minister had failed to address a finding by the Refugee Applications Commissioner that, if his claim were well-founded, state protection would not be available. The respondents said any shortcoming on that point could not affect the decision because the claim of risk of serious harm had been rejected.
Justice Richard Humphreys said the effect of the state-protection issue depended on the wording of the decisions in this particular case. He concluded that it was not wholly redundant, given how the relevant statutory provisions referred to country information. The deportation decision had not specifically addressed the Commissioner’s favourable finding on state protection.
The judge said the Minister could have made clear that the refoulement conclusion rested solely on the credibility rejection after considering country material, or explained why the Commissioner’s view was rejected or compatible with a conclusion of non-refoulement.
The court did not quash the subsidiary protection refusal. It also left the deportation proposal and the other reasoning in the order standing, including matters concerning statutory deportation criteria and family life. No fresh deportation proposal or invitation for submissions was required. The Minister must make a new decision on the refoulement issue alone under section 50 of the International Protection Act 2015.