The High Court has refused an applicant’s request for leave to bring judicial review proceedings challenging a decision not to recognise him as a refugee. Mr Justice McDermott ruled that none of the grounds advanced justified relief.
The case concerned a Refugee Appeals Tribunal decision made on 2 September 2008, which confirmed a recommendation that the applicant not be declared a refugee. The judgment, delivered on 7 March 2014, describes the applicant as a Nigerian national. His name is anonymised in the judgment.
The applicant told the asylum authorities that he had taken part in kidnappings and other violent activities with the Niger Delta Volunteer Force (NDVF), and that Nigerian authorities and former associates posed a threat to him. The judgment records that the tribunal considered him generally credible and accepted that he had a subjective fear of harm.
The court upheld the tribunal’s treatment of his fear of former NDVF associates. It found that the tribunal had reasonably concluded the fear was not objectively well founded: apart from the applicant’s account, there was no evidence that the group targeted former members or suspected informants. The court also found that the applicant had not provided a satisfactory explanation for the absence of relevant supporting material under the applicable protection regulations.
The tribunal had accepted that the applicant’s fear of the Nigerian authorities was objectively well founded, citing a newspaper “wanted poster” and information about conflict between the government and Niger Delta militants. But it concluded that he was wanted for criminal conduct, rather than persecuted for a political opinion. It considered the violent kidnappings too remote from the NDVF’s stated political aims and disproportionate to those aims.
The High Court found that conclusion reasonable. It said the tribunal had properly considered whether the claimed political purpose changed the character of the offences, and found no evidence that prosecution or punishment in Nigeria would be excessive or discriminatory. The court said the alleged conduct would be criminal in Ireland and that the authorities could be expected to pursue prosecution in accordance with law.
The court refused relief on every ground. It added that any further objection concerning Nigerian criminal law or procedure could more properly be addressed under section 3 of the Immigration Act 1999 if deportation were considered. The judgment did not decide any deportation issue.