Eritrean asylum seeker wins leave for review

T -v- Refugee Appeals Tribunal anor Neutral citation (2010) IEHC 370

T -v- Refugee Appeals Tribunal anorNeutral citation (2010) IEHC 370

High Court

Judgment was delivered on September 29th, 2010, by Ms Justice Maureen Harding Clark.

Judgment

READ MORE

A female Eritrean asylum seeker was granted leave to challenge the decision of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal to reject her application for asylum on the grounds that the tribunal’s conclusions about the medical evidence were unreasonable and irrational, and the member acted in breach of fair procedures in failing to assess relevant submissions concerning the applicant’s fear of persecution.

Background

The applicant, who said she was a native of Eritrea, applied for political asylum in February 2006.

She said her husband had been arrested in 2005 and she was told by a friend to destroy his papers. She was herself arrested, detained and mistreated, including sustaining beatings, cigarette burns, sexual assaults and rapes. She became unconscious and was brought to hospital, from where she escaped. She travelled afterwards from Port Sudan to Ireland.

The Refugee Applications Commissioner found her account of her arrest and detention was not credible because it was very vague, and recommended she not be declared a refugee.

She appealed to the Refugee Appeals Tribunal, where she furnished additional medical evidence, including a medico- legal report from the organisation for treating victims of torture, Spirasi. This noted her severe psychological difficulties, an unstable right knee and scars on her inner thighs and chest consistent with cigarette burns. A physician stated her physical and mental state were consistent with the ill-treatment she claimed she experienced.

The tribunal member rejected her appeal, agreeing with the RAC commissioner’s assessment of her lack of credibility. She stated the Spirasi reports were not conclusive evidence of that which the applicant claimed happened to her. The applicant sought leave for judicial review on the basis that there was an inadequate assessment of the medical evidence, and insufficient regard paid to her psychological condition.

In addition, her legal representative made a legal submission that, by virtue of her status as a failed asylum seeker and as a member of the particular social group of women asylum seekers, she would face persecution on return to Eritrea.

This submission included country of origin reports from Amnesty International and others which pointed to evidence of arrest and torture of those forcibly returned to Eritrea.

Decision

Ms Justice Harding Clark said the court was concerned there was no reference to these submissions or country of origin reports in the decision of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal, which raised the possibility that they were not considered at all.

She therefore granted leave on the grounds that in the assessment of credibility, the tribunal member had erred in the approach to the medical evidence and her conclusions with respect to credibility and the medical evidence were unreasonable and irrational, and that the member acted in breach of fair procedures in failing to assess directly relevant submissions and country of origin information.

The full judgment is on www.courts.ie


Lawyers: Eve Bourached BL, instructed by Conor O’Briain, North King Street, Dublin, for the applicant; Siobhán Stack BL, instructed by the Chief State Solicitor, for the respondent