Court of Appeal holds that journalist facing Al Shabaab death threats cannot be returned to Somalia

13/07/16

The Court of Appeal has handed down an important judgment on the meaning of the Qualification Directive, which governs the rules for determining asylum applications in the EU.

The respondent applied for asylum on the ground that he faced a real risk of persecution in Somalia. The risk resulted from his profession as a radio presenter in Mogadishu, where journalists are perceived to oppose Al Shabaab, and are therefore at risk of being killed or seriously injured, unless they dissemble support for the group.

The Secretary of State argued that the respondent could avoid any risk of harm by working as a teacher, which was his previous profession. Further, it would not breach the respondent’s human rights to force him to change his profession because he was not a political journalist.

The Court of Appeal rejected the Secretary of State’s arguments. Beatson LJ held that, properly interpreted, the Upper Tribunal’s determination had found that the respondent would express anti-Al Shabaab views upon return to Mogadishu. He would therefore face a real risk of persecution on grounds of his political opinion. Beatson LJ went on to address an important point of principle: whether it is open to the Government to reject a claim for asylum on the basis that the asylum seeker can be expected to take action (such as changing jobs) to avoid persecution if returned.  Beatson LJ held that the answer to this question is no.  It  would therefore have been unlawful to force the respondent to change his profession upon return to Somalia.

Beatson LJ said that he was “particularly grateful” for "powerful” submissions of the intervener, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (“UNHCR”).

The judgment appears here.