Ms Justice Maureen Harding Clark has criticised the Refugee Appeals Tribunal over its decision in relation to a Sudanese asylum seeker. Ms Justice Clark described the Tribunal’s decision as “unfair and irrational”. Furthermore, she said she thought the Tribunal’s decision was guided by a dislike for the individual as opposed to a concrete examination of relevant facts, testimonies and documentation.
AAMO, the asylum seeker in question, was seeking judicial review of the appeals tribunal decision to uphold the initial tribunal decision. AAMO was a human rights defender who fled his native Sudan in 2009 to avoid persecution at the hands of the Sudanese Government. Despite providing a raft of documentation to support his asylum application, AAMO’s application was rejected. Ms Justice Clark concluded that the Commissioner’s office had “failed the refugee assessment process abysmally”.
Elaborating on the Tribunal’s failure to consider relevant documentation, Ms Justice Clark stated: “The court is satisfied to a very high degree that documents clearly capable of corroborating or confirming the truth of the applicant’s account were disregarded in favour of a heavy reliance on the applicant’s demeanour which the tribunal member did not favour.” Ms Justice Clark quashed the decision allowing AAMO to return to the appeal tribunal where she hoped AAMO’s case would be heard “humanely and expeditiously.”
Click here to read a summary of Ms Justice Clark’s decision on the Irish Times website.
Click here to read a blog entry by Liam Thornton on the Human Rights in Ireland website. In that article, Dr Thornton says that “this is not the first time that concerns have been raised about the conduct and capabilities of members of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal … [and] there needs to be publication of all past, current and future decisions of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal.”