The High Court has refused an Angolan man leave to challenge the Refugee Appeals Tribunal’s rejection of his asylum appeal, finding that he had not established substantial grounds for judicial review.
Mr Justice Hedigan also extended the time for bringing the proceedings. They had been started outside the 14-day limit, but the respondents did not oppose an extension, and the judge found good and sufficient reason to grant one.
The applicant, identified in the judgment only as J. A., said he had been involved with the separatist movement FLEC in Cabinda since 1995. He claimed Angolan soldiers attacked his family home in June 2004, took him away and tortured him. He said a general who was an informer for FLEC helped him and his family flee to Ireland. These were his account of events, not findings made by the court.
The Refugee Appeals Tribunal rejected his appeal in November 2006, after an earlier decision had been set aside by agreement and the case remitted for a new hearing. The applicant sought leave to challenge the later decision, arguing that the tribunal had failed to consider documents, inadequately assessed a medical report about his injuries, and made irrational credibility findings.
The judge rejected those arguments at the leave stage. He said the absence of specific references to the FLEC membership card, a letter from the movement’s European headquarters, and a report about the applicant’s daughters did not establish that the tribunal had ignored them. He also found the GP’s report, which described an injury as “consistent with a stabbing”, had limited probative value because it did not explain when or how the injury occurred.
The court found no irrationality in the tribunal’s credibility assessment. Hedigan J. acknowledged possible confusion over the applicant’s drawing of a national identity card, but said any error was not fatal to the decision when considered as a whole.
The ruling determined only whether the applicant could proceed with judicial review. The court refused leave; it did not quash the tribunal’s decision or make a new determination of the asylum claim.