Lucia Coerman secures Humanitarian Protection for Iraqi appellant in asylum appeal
Lucia Coerman’s client was granted Humanitarian Protection following a successful appeal before the First-tier Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber).
The appellant, a national of Iraq, had claimed asylum on the basis that he and his father had been tortured in connection with a land dispute involving the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK). The claim faced significant evidential difficulties. The Home Office relied on evidence suggesting the appellant had misstated his age and argued that, having refused to answer questions during his asylum interview, his account should be treated as wholly unreliable. The Secretary of State relied on section 8(2) and section 8(3) of the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants, etc.) Act 2004, submitting that the appellant’s conduct undermined his credibility in its entirety.
On behalf of the appellant, counsel argued that the age discrepancy arose from a genuinely held belief about his date of birth, based solely on information given to him by his mother and in circumstances where he had never possessed or seen identity documentation. Counsel further invited the Tribunal to adopt an approach analogous to a Lucas direction, submitting that even if the appellant had been mistaken or untruthful in one aspect of his evidence, that did not mean that the remainder of his account must necessarily be rejected.
While the Tribunal did not accept the appellant’s account of the underlying land dispute in Iraq, it accepted that the appellant was no longer in contact with his parents and had no identity documentation.
The Tribunal accepted submissions that, in light of Home Office country guidance concerning Iraq, individuals who return without identity documents may be able to enter the country using a laissez-passer, but will face serious difficulties when attempting to travel internally or access essential services. In such circumstances, the Tribunal found there was a real risk of treatment contrary to Article 3 ECHR.
On that basis, the appeal was allowed on Humanitarian Protection grounds.
