A YOUNG man from Darfur in Sudan who claims he was kept as a slave in the war-torn African state for years before fleeing there has secured leave from the High Court to bring a challenge to a decision refusing him refugee status here.
The 23-year-old man is illiterate and claims he was brought from Darfur in western Sudan at the age of five to a village in eastern Sudan where he was made work as a shepherd for a large landowner and former politician.
He says he was effectively a slave, was beaten regularly and received little income.
He claims he ran away in May 2005, got a lift on a lorry to Libya where he worked on a farm before coming to Ireland in 2006 when he unsuccessfully applied for asylum. Being a member of a non-Arab ethnic group in Darfur, he claimed he was at particular risk of persecution if returned and that the man who allegedly enslaved him would pursue him.
In 2008, a Refugee Appeals Tribunal rejected his appeal against the refusal of refugee status on the basis of a UK Home Office country of origin operational guidance note of April 2008 on Sudan, to the effect there was no general risk to Darfuri asylum seekers if returned to the Sudanese capital Khartoum, rather than the Darfur states. In seeking leave for judicial review of that decision, the man argued the tribunal should have obtained additional country of origin information which, he claimed, supported his arguments against being returned to any part of Sudan.
The man said a UK Home Office country of origin information bulletin on Sudan of July 26th, 2008, published after the hearing of his appeal – but before the tribunal decision was made – reported that Sudanese security forces committed widespread human rights violations following a May 2008 attack on Khartoum by a Darfur based rebel group.
That bulletin stated mainly Darfurian ethnic groups had been targeted and subject to arbitrary arrest, enforced disappearance, extra-judicial execution, torture and other ill-treatment.
The man claimed this information effectively changed the scene and should have been obtained and referred to by the tribunal because of its substantial bearing on the case.
In his judgment, Mr Justice John MacMenamin said the Refugee Appeals Tribunal appeared to have relied on the April 2008 UK Home Office operational guidance note concluding non-Arab ethnic Darfuris were not at risk of persecution outside the Darfur states.
That April 2008 note however also contained a disclaimer referring to any additional country of origin information which might be available at the Home Office website, the judge noted.
Having considered relevant legal decisions, Mr Justice MacMenamin ruled the man had made out an arguable case for judicial review as to the obligations of the tribunal to consider all relevant facts relating to the country of origin “at the time of taking a decision” on an appeal.
The judge said it was also arguable whether it was reasonable to conclude, on the facts of this case, a tribunal member’s obligation went further than a mere consideration of information provided by an applicant or obtained by the tribunal itself, neither of which may be entirely up to date. Arguably, he added, the issue arises only on “unusual facts”.