The High Court has refused a Nigerian man’s application to quash a decision rejecting his asylum claim, finding that the Refugee Appeals Tribunal had acted lawfully and within its jurisdiction.
In a judgment delivered on 22 July 2016, Ms Justice Stewart said the court’s role in the judicial review was to assess whether the Tribunal’s process was legally sound. It could not substitute its own view of the evidence for the Tribunal’s.
The applicant, identified in the judgment as A.F. (Nigeria), said he was gay and had suffered attacks in Nigeria because of his sexuality. He alleged that his partner was killed in an attack on their home in Maiduguri and that his mother later died from injuries after a fire at her home. He said he feared persecution if returned to Nigeria.
The Refugee Applications Commissioner recommended refusing refugee status, citing credibility concerns. The Refugee Appeals Tribunal affirmed that decision. It accepted that laws and attacks targeting gay people in Nigeria could amount to persecution, but found the central issue was whether the applicant’s claim to be gay was credible.
The applicant challenged the Tribunal’s treatment of his evidence, including his account of his relationship, the alleged attacks and deaths, and letters from the LGBT support group Belong. He also argued that parts of the credibility assessment relied on conjecture and that he had not been given a fair opportunity to provide further documents.
Justice Stewart concluded that the Tribunal’s assessment of the applicant’s account of public displays of affection was a permissible inference from his evidence. She rejected the argument that the Tribunal had applied a stereotype requiring gay people to keep their relationships secret. The court also found that the Tribunal had considered the Belong letters, but was entitled to assess them alongside all the other evidence rather than treat them as proof of the applicant’s sexuality.
The judge said the Tribunal had considered the evidence cumulatively, including the applicant’s account of the attacks, his alleged relationship, his move within Nigeria, his knowledge of Maiduguri, the absence of documentary evidence and inconsistencies concerning his mother’s reported death. The Tribunal concluded that his claim to be gay was not credible.
The court refused the reliefs sought, which included quashing the Tribunal’s decision and sending the appeal back for a fresh determination. The judgment did not itself determine the applicant’s refugee status; it upheld the lawfulness of the process challenged in the judicial review.