Description
Applying the relevant law to the following scenario, give the judge your view on the legal issues raised and the most appropriate way of resolving them:
Scenario:
Khalid is a national of Iraq and was born a Shia Muslim. He lived in the North of Iraq with his family. He came to study philosophy in the UK in 2015. In 2016, his home town was overrun by forces linked to Daesh (Islamic State), a military group that in some places sought to kill Shias who refused to renounce their faith in favour of Sunni Islam. Khalid did not return to Iraq as his family said it was too dangerous. His student visa expired in 2017 and he claimed asylum but he heard nothing from the Home Office. He then became an evangelical Christian who promoted his views in Arabic on his website which began to attract many subscribers.
Iraqi Kurdish forces fought Daesh and recaptured Khalid’s hometown in 2018. The situation remains unstable and Khalid has heard that Daesh still have spies everywhere. He is afraid to return to his hometown because of the level of violence still going on. He also fears for his safety now that he is a Christian. Khalid says he cannot be an openly evangelical Christian in Iraq, even in Baghdad. He says that he has no support network in Baghdad and that there are still lots of bombings and shootings there. The general public is not safe. He fears that he would become destitute there.
In December 2020, the Home Office refused his application saying:
(a) he would not face persecution because civilians in his home area can seek protection from Kurdish forces;
(b) his claim is not credible because he only claimed asylum after his visa expired;
(c) his ‘conversion’ to Christianity is not genuine but is instead a tactic to secure asylum;
(d) he can relocate to Baghdad where there is no violence and the Constitution protects religious minorities.
Khalid lodged an appeal under s82 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. At the hearing, he filed a bundle of evidence including copies of his blog posts and also threats he has received on his webpages. He has not been able to afford to translate these into English but asks the judge if he can use the court interpreter to read them out. He says they say ‘Death to you! Apostate!’ He does not have a lawyer.
He gives evidence and says that he became interested in Christianity in 2014 after reading some Bible passages. He kept quiet about this out of fear. The Home Office’s lawyer says that he is not credible because he only started his evangelical blog in 2017 after his visa expired. The judge asks Khalid some detailed questions about why he is a Christian. Khalid explains that he had many discussions with fellow students in the UK that led him to convert. His church requires that he try to spread Christianity, so he started his blog in Arabic. He has one witness – a member of Khalid’s church – who gives evidence and confirms Khalid’s account. The judge has reserved her decision.
