Adverse credibility findings were substantial and definitive in refusal of asylum to Sudanese national

Judicial review – telescoped hearing - Sudanese national challenging the decision of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal to refuse him refugee status – among the opponents to the building of the Kajbar Dam - claims that it would have flooded his farm and house - he supported the Nubian political party in its efforts against the dam – authorities arrested him, held him for ten days and released him on the condition that he not continue to support the groups opposed to the building of the dam - he had to periodically sign at a local security office - attended a peaceful protest, where he was again arrested and held for a one-month period – tortured - released on the condition that he remain in the area and not continue to gather support for the anti-dam group - continued his activities in secret - again arrested - attended a protest - four protesters were shot - authorities attempted to arrest him on this occasion but he escaped and fled - informed him that state agents are seeking his whereabouts – adverse credibility findings – argued that the tribunal member should have applied a forward-looking test - tribunal member should have considered, not just political grounds, but also grounds of race, which were stated by the applicant from the outset - case is not only in relation to his political activities but also in relation to the fact that he is a Nubian who is sought by the authorities - argued that, having rejected the core claim in relation to the dam, the tribunal member should have applied the forward-looking test in relation to the applicant’s contention that he is a Nubian who is being sought by the authorities - essential feature of a refugee determination procedure is the assessment of the likelihood of risk of future persecution, and this should be considered by the decision-maker if a decision is to stand - medical evidence was not appropriately dealt with - SPIRASI report - Istanbul Protocol - tribunal is obliged to fully consider the medical evidence when that evidence is prima facie capable of substantiating the applicant’s claim in a case where the applicant’s claim is not accepted based upon rejection of credibility - Arabic interpreter provided to him at his interview spoke with an Algerian Arabic dialect and accent and that he was unable to properly understand - where the very core of an applicant's claim is not believed, the decision-maker is not obliged to carry out an artificial exercise and assess what might occur if a hypothetical person with the applicant's disbelieved history and characteristics were returned to the applicant's country of origin.