The High Court has refused a judicial review application seeking to quash a Refugee Appeals Tribunal recommendation that a minor applicant not be declared a refugee.
In a judgment delivered on 7 July 2015, Mr Justice Eagar said the tribunal had set out the credibility issues and its reasons clearly, and had adequately dealt with country of origin information submitted on the applicant’s behalf. The court therefore refused the application for certiorari.
The applicant, identified in the judgment as A.A.J., was a Sierra Leone national who said he was born in August 1993. He arrived in Dublin in September 2009 and applied for asylum in January 2010, aged 16. His claim included a fear of persecution in Guinea linked to an uncle or cousin he described as a commandant and associate of former Guinean president Lansana Contè. He said he had been assaulted in June 2009 when people came seeking the relative, who was injured and abducted.
The tribunal questioned the account, citing, among other matters, the lack of corroborating records from Guinea, gaps in the applicant’s account of his relative’s fate and his journey to Ireland, and differences between his description of injuries and Dublin hospital records. It also considered the applicant’s asserted Sierra Leonean nationality and conditions there. These were the tribunal’s credibility findings, not findings independently made by the High Court about whether the alleged events occurred.
The applicant’s counsel argued that the tribunal had relied on conjecture, failed to take adequate account of the applicant’s age, and had not properly explained parts of its reasoning. Counsel also challenged its consideration of Sierra Leone and the medical evidence. The State’s counsel defended the tribunal’s assessment, including its consideration of the applicant’s account, medical records and country information.
The High Court reviewed the tribunal’s reasoning under judicial review principles. Referring to earlier authorities, it said a credibility decision should be read as a whole and that reasons need not address every item of evidence or argument if they allow the applicant and the reviewing court to understand the basis of the conclusion.
The court was satisfied that the tribunal had explained its credibility assessment and had adequately addressed the country information. It refused the application for certiorari. The judgment does not grant or determine refugee status; it leaves the tribunal recommendation unquashed.