Facts: The applicant, a national of the Democratic Republic of Congo (“DRC”) applied for asylum in March, 2008, claiming to have left Kinshasa two days earlier and travelled to Ireland via Congo Brazzaville, Morocco and Turkey using a Portuguese passport provided by an agent. She said that she had never held a passport and had never been outside of the … Read More
NRM (DRC) v Refugee Appeals Tribunal, Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Ireland and the Attorney General
Respondent/Defendant: | Refugee Appeals Tribunal and Minister for Justice and Law Reform, Ireland and the Attorney General |
Court/s: | High Court |
Citation/s: | [2014] IEHC 120 |
Nature of Proceedings: | Judicial Review |
Judgment Date/s: | 20 Jan 2014 |
Judge: | Clark J. |
Category: | Refugee Law |
Keywords: | Asylum, Persecution, Refugee |
Country of Origin: | Democratic Republic of Congo |
URL: | https://www.courts.ie/acc/alfresco/6dbbede4-0b49-49a1-b541-6733e9bce818/2014_IEHC_120_1.pdf/pdf#view=fitH |
Geographic Focus: | Ireland |
Principles: | It is not sufficient when misrepresentation on the part of an applicant for asylum has been shown for that applicant to accept that what has been said is untrue, and then apologise for the lies. The applicant must give a clear, coherent, substantial and reasonable explanation for actively misleading the asylum authorities. Misrepresentation and dishonesty must have consequences, especially when an applicant has had many opportunities to disclose any earlier misrepresentation motivated, for example, by fear of being returned to the country from which he or she had fled. A Tribunal’s findings will not be invalidated simply because an asylum applicant’s self-reporting of events to a medical practitioner, as may be working on behalf of SPIRASI, is consistent with his or her account to the asylum authorities, particularly where aspects of the claim related by the applicant lack credibility. |