The applicant applied for refugee status on the basis that he had a well-founded fear of persecution in his country of origin, Guinea, because of his political opinion. He was refused both at first instance and on appeal. He challenged the decisions against him, arguing that the description he provided of prison life in Guinea for members of the political opposition was consistent with the objective country of origin information, and that his claim of past persecution in this context was corroborated by scarring on his body.
Referring to The Refugee in International Law by Guy Goodwin-Gill, the Court stated that “[s]imply considered there are just two issues. First could the applicant’s story have happened, or could his or her apprehension come to pass … given what we know from available country of origin information? Secondly, is the applicant personally believable? If the story is consistent with what is known about the country of origin, then the basis for the right inferences has been laid.” The Court held that the assessment of credibility was a relevant matter for the decision-maker, but that in the instant case there was material before the decision-maker to justify the decision that the applicant lacked credibility.
