MH (Nigeria) v Minister for Justice
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Judge | Ms. Justice Stewart |
| Judgment Date | 08 July 2015 |
| Neutral Citation | [2015] IEHC 430 |
| Date | 08 July 2015 |
| Court | High Court |
| Docket Number | [2010 No. 1555 J.R.] |
[2015] IEHC 430
THE HIGH COURT
JUDICIAL REVIEW
Stewart J.
[2010 No. 1555 J.R.]
Asylum, Immigration & Nationality – Leave to seek judicial review – Internal relocation – Fear of persecution – Medical condition – Country of origin information
Facts: The applicant sought leave for judicial review of the decision of the second named respondent affirming the decision of the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner that the applicant should not be declared a refugee. The applicant contended that the second named respondent while recommending for internal location of the applicant within the country of origin had overlooked the fact that there would be no sufficient medical facilities available for the treatment of colorectal cancer that the applicant was suffering. The applicant alleged maltreatment and harassment in the country of origin and stated that since his partner and son were already living in Ireland, he had reasons to be there.
Ms. Justice Stewart refused to grant leave to seek judicial review of the decision of the second named respondent. The Court held that the there existed no error of law in the decision of the second named respondent. The Court held that the second named respondent had adequately considered the medical evidence presented before it and rightly observed that the applicant had failed to demonstrate fear of persecution objectively for the purposes of the Convention since he had the option of internal relocation to a place having all the requisite facilities needed for the medical treatment of the applicant and a better atmosphere for his well being.
This is a telescoped application for leave to seek judicial review of the decision of the Refugee Appeals Tribunal dated 4th November, 2010, affirming the negative recommendation of the Offices of the Refugee Applications Commissioner, that the applicant not be declared a refugee.
A preliminary issue arose with regard to the necessary extension of time for the applicant to initiate these proceedings. The delay was minimal and explained by the applicant on affidavit. The respondents did not take any issue with the explanation provided and, in the circumstances I grant the necessary extension of time.
The applicant is a Nigerian national born on 11th August, 1973, in Kano state, Nigeria. He is a Christian of the Hausa ethnic group and has twelve years of formal education. He worked for twelve years as a clothes trader in the markets in Kano before he left Nigeria. The following is the applicant's account of that which gave rise to the alleged persecution. He states that as a Christian he suffered persecution at the hands of a hisbah militant group in northern Nigeria, a group of Muslim extremists. He claims that his family had been persecuted and harassed for many years by the militant group due to the fact that he and his family were Christians. His mother was killed in 1998 in a riot because she was a Christian, and in 2001 he was arrested on two different occasions by members of the group, detained for extended periods of time and badly beaten. He was a member of a Christian charismatic group and used to distribute literature at rallies.
In 2003, he states that his partner became pregnant and, because the couple were not married, she fled to Ireland for fear of persecution under Islamic law. The applicant's son was born in Ireland in 2003 and is an Irish citizen.
On the 3rd April, 2007, the Christian group, including the applicant, was attacked by the hisbah group. The applicant managed to flee; however, people were killed. The applicant further states that when he returned to his home, it had been burnt down. When he reported the matter to the police he was advised to leave the area. As a result, the applicant states, leaflets bearing his name, claiming he was against the imposition of Islamic law, meant that he could not relocate. The applicant travelled to Lagos with the intention of leaving the country. He states that while in Lagos he complained to police about the alleged persecution he had suffered in the north of the country. The police filed a report.
The applicant decided to travel to Ireland because his partner and son were in this State, and he states that he thought it would be a safe country. He states that he paid an agent 170,000 naira for travel to Ireland. He left Nigeria on 25th June, 2007, and travelled by air, transiting through London, then onwards to Belfast and by bus from Belfast to Dublin. The applicant has a history of colorectal cancer, having suffered, and being treated for, the first occurrence in 2001 in Nigeria and the second occurrence in December, 2008 in Ireland.
The applicant presented at the Office of the Refugee Applications Commissioner (ORAC) on 26th June, 2007, and completed an ASY1 form on that date. The applicant was interviewed by the ORAC pursuant to s.11 of the Refugee Act 1996 (as amended) on 20th July, 2007. By letter dated 26th July, 2007, and a report of that date, the commissioner recommended that the applicant not be declared a refugee. A notice of appeal was issued by the applicant's solicitors on 13th August, 2007, and the applicant was interviewed by the Refugee Appeals Tribunal (RAT) on 13th July, 2010.
The Refugee Appeals Tribunal issued a decision, affirming the negative recommendation of ORAC, dated 4th November, 2010. Herein, the tribunal member found that ‘internal relocation to live in a city away from Kano such as Lagos would be a viable option for the applicant to escape any alleged threats from Hisbah militants operating in northern Nigeria’. (p.17 of decision)
Further, the tribunal member found that the applicant ‘failed to provide any reasonable explanation as to why he could not relocate to live in Lagos when this matter was put to him at the hearing’.
Counsel for the applicant, Mr. Ian Whelan B.L., submitted that due to the fact that the applicant had had cancer, internal relocation would have been unduly harsh...
To continue reading
Request your trial