High Court grants judicial review of the decision to refuse a Malawian national refugee status, on the grounds that the Refugee Appeals Tribunal’s negative credibility findings were based on a flawed assessment of some of the core issues in her claim.
Judicial review – asylum and immigration – substantive hearing – Malawian national challenging the decision of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal to refuse her refugee status – alleges that she suffered persecution from her uncles due to inheriting her father’s farm - sold her land rights – death threats from uncles - burned her house down, leaving her hospitalised for a week – no arrests following complaint to hospital – more threats – travelled to the State – application for asylum refused on credibility grounds - core facts – principles governing the assessment of credibility - emphasis was on the absence of documentation – failed to consider her explanations – assessment from tribunal’s cultural prospective without regard to country of origin information - failure to properly address the documents which the applicant did produce - lack of documentary proof - Regulation 5(3)- did not consider whether her general credibility had been established - rejection of her claim to have inherited her father’s farm was based squarely on the lack of documentary evidence - decision-maker did not find documents provided corroborative – inconsistency - inaccurate analysis of the evidence tendered – no detail of the procedure involved in selling the land – not unreasonable for the tribunal to take into account - Tribunal Member’s emphasis was on the absence of any document from LB which showed his contract or dealings with the applicant for the sale of lands, an emphasis which this court does not find to be unreasonable - no obligation on the decision-maker to engage in a discursive narrative as to the probative value documents furnished - treatment of the police report – tribunal failed to have regard to or weigh her explanation for the lack of any mention in the report to the threats from her uncles - decision-maker could not reasonably have concluded that the police report was not probative or authentic because in reaching his decision it is not apparent to the reader or the court whether the Tribunal Member weighed her explanation for the absence in the police report to the threat to her life from her uncles – judicial review granted.