Tribunal decisions

The decision

Upper Tribunal
(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: PA/01738/2015

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

Heard at Manchester
Decision & Reasons Promulgated
On December 9, 2016
On December 9, 2016

Before

DEPUTY UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE ALIS

Between

MR JUHAR KEDIR MOHAMMED
(NO ANONYMITY DIRECTION MADE)
Appellant
and

THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent

Representation:
Appellant Ms Bremang, Counsel, instructed by Supreme
Solicitors
Respondent Ms Peterson (Senior Home Office Presenting Officer)

DECISION AND REASONS

1. I do not make an anonymity order under rule 14 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008 (SI 2008/2698 as amended).

2. The appellant is a national of Ethiopia. On May 14, 2015 the appellant entered the United Kingdom illegally and he claimed asylum the following day. The respondent refused his application on September 30, 2015 under paragraphs 336 and 339F HC 395.

3. The appellant appealed that decision on October 13, 2015 under Section 82(1) of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 and his appeal came before Judge of the First-tier Tribunal Maxwell (hereinafter referred to as "the Judge" on June 23, 2016. In a decision promulgated on July 11, 2016 he dismissed his claims.

4. The appellant appealed the Judge's decision on July 25, 2016 and permission to appeal was granted by Judge of the First-tier Tribunal Bennett on August 3, 2016. The matter then went before Upper Tribunal Judge Martin on November 18, 2016 and in a decision promulgated the same day she found the Judge had erred in his approach to the appellant's sur plas activities. However, she upheld the Judge's other findings including the fact he was not an Oromo.

5. The matter came before me on the above date and on that occasion I heard submissions from both representatives. I reserved my decision.

PRELIMINARY ISSUES

6. The representatives confirmed I should have regard documents numbered 1-4 in the appellant's original bundle and I should also have regard to the supplemental bundle.

SUBMISSIONS

7. Miss Peterson invited me to place no weight on either Professor Trueman's report or Dr Berri's report. Professor Trueman's report was out of date and no weight should be attached to it as the last reference to problems was from 2008. Dr Berri's report, whilst current, was not supported by any relevant evidence. No evidence had been adduced to show the Ethiopian authorities monitored what happened abroad. Dr Berri's report was prepared on the basis he was an Oromo and this had been rejected by the Judge. She invited me to dismiss the appeal.

8. Miss Bremang invited me to find that returning the appellant would place him at risk because of his actions in the United Kingdom. She submitted the issue in this appeal was whether his actions would have come to the attention of the authorities because she submitted if they would come to their attention then the objective evidence demonstrated that he would be at risk. She referred me to the expert report of Professor Trueman and the letter of Dr Berri as evidence of problems in Ethiopia for OLF supporters. There were pictures of his activities here albeit she accepted there was no evidence that these had been produced in social media. The more recent bundle of evidence demonstrated there was a state of emergency in Ethiopia. She invited me to find he was at risk of persecution.

DISCUSSION AND FINDINGS

9. In setting the remit for today's hearing Upper Tribunal Judge Martin identified a narrow issue for me to consider.

10. The Judge had rejected the appellant's claim to be Oromo and there was no evidence that the appellant had engaged in any political activities prior to arriving in the United Kingdom save his claim that he distributed leaflets and money and attended meetings after 2013. The Judge rejected his activities in Ethiopia and accordingly the issue for me to determine was whether his attendances at meetings and demonstrations engaged the Refugee Convention.

11. The evidence submitted by him (Dr Berri, his own evidence and photographs) showed he had started attended meetings after his asylum claim had been refused. Dr Berri only met him in November 2015 at the annual OLF and supporters conference in Bolton. Dr Berri confirmed that since that meeting he had participated in Oromo activities including the aforementioned conference, an Oromo protest in London in December 2015 and an OLF meeting in December 2015.

12. The problem with Dr Berri's report is that he accepted the appellant is an Oromo but this has been rejected by the Tribunal. The other problem is that Dr Berri's report provided no country evidence to support Miss Bremang's submission that sur plas activities are monitored by the authorities.

13. The report of Professor Trueman is out of date with the last reported incident in 2008. This report was not prepared for this appeal and is generic in nature. The report again does not support Miss Bremang's submission that sur plas activities are monitored by the authorities.

14. Miss Bremang acknowledged that there was no evidence to support a submission that the photographs in the bundle had come to the attention of the Ethiopian authorities. They did not appear on any social media. There was no evidence his attendance at any of the meetings referred to above had been monitored by the authorities.

15. I am therefore drawn to the conclusion that the appellant's activities in the United Kingdom would not place him at risk. He does not form part of a risk category as set out in MB (OLF and MTA-risk) Ethiopia CG [2007] UKAIT 00030 and I therefore find he can safely be returned to Ethiopia.

DECISION

16. The making of the decision of the First-tier Tribunal did involve the making of an error on a point of law. I have remade the decision and I dismiss the appellant's asylum claim.

Signed: Dated:

Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Alis

FEE AWARD
TO THE RESPONDENT

I make no fee award as I dismissed the appeal.

Signed: Dated:

Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Alis