Tribunal decisions

The decision

IN THE UPPER TRIBUNAL
IMMIGRATION AND ASYLUM CHAMBER Case No: UI-2026-000589
First-tier Tribunal No: PA/53226/2024

THE IMMIGRATION ACTS

Decision & Reasons Issued:

On 30th of September 2026

Before

UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE FRANCES

Between

A K
(ANONYMITY ORDER MADE)
Appellant
and

SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
Respondent

Representation:
For the Appellant: Mr F Ahmad, instructed by Hanson Law
For the Respondent: Mrs A Nolan, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer

Heard at Field House on 21 September 2026

Order Regarding Anonymity

Pursuant to rule 14 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008, the appellant is granted anonymity. No-one shall publish or reveal any information, including the name or address of the appellant, likely to lead members of the public to identify the appellant. Failure to comply with this order could amount to a contempt of court.

DECISION AND REASONS
1. The appellant is a citizen of Iraq born in 1971. His appeal against the decision of the First-tier Tribunal (FTT) dated 25 November 2025 was allowed by the Upper Tribunal (UT) on 19 August 2026. The decision of the FTT was set aside with preserved findings and the hearing was adjourned for remaking before the UT.
2. The following findings were preserved. The appellant is at risk on return to his home area of Kirkuk from family members and ISIS. It is the appellant’s case that he has done his biometrics in Iraq and he has previously been issued with an Iraqi National ID card (INID). The appellant’s INID was taken with his passport by the agent who brought him to the UK. There was sufficiency of protection from the police and/or the Peshmerga. The appellant relocated for 5 to 6 months before he came to the UK and he could internally relocate within the KRI on return. The UT found there was no error of law in respect of the FTT’s findings under Articles 3 and 8 of the ECHR. The issue before the UT on remaking is whether the appellant has an INID or could reasonably obtain one.
3. It was agreed that, following the Country Bulletin Iraq: Internal relocation, civil documentation and returns (update following setting aside of Country Guidance) July 2026 (CB 2026), the issue before me is whether the appellant can reasonably obtain an INID. The burden is on the appellant and the standard of proof is the lower standard, a reasonable degree of likelihood. It is the respondent’s case that the appellant will be returned to Baghdad.

Relevant background material
4. The CB 2026 states that decision makers must follow the information and guidance in the archived Country Policy and Information Note Iraq: Internal relocation, civil documentation and returns, version 15, dated October 2025 (CPIN 2025) which was based on SMO and KSP (Civil status documentation, article 15) Iraq CG [2022] UKUT 110 (IAC) (SMO2). However, available information indicates that there have been subsequent factual developments which means decision makers should now depart from some of the findings in SMO2, specifically in relation to the roll out of the INID and the ability to obtain an INID in the UK. The Civil Status Identity Document (CSID) is being replaced with a new biometric INID. The CSID and the Iraqi Nationality Certificate (INC) are no longer valid and cannot be used. They have been replaced by the INID
5. The CB 2026 states that since October 2024, Iraqi nationals in the UK have been able to apply for and obtain an INID at the Iraqi Embassy in London. The onus is on the person to demonstrate that they do not have and cannot obtain the required documents. The onus is on the person to demonstrate that they are unable to obtain an INID from the Embassy. The procedure for issuing an INID as a replacement for a lost one is as follows:
“In the event that the original documents are lost in the United Kingdom, it is necessary to contact a police station to report the loss of the documents and provide proof that the necessary procedures of the competent authorities have been followed, along with having followed the procedures before the competent authorities, together with proof of the loss report and an Arabic translation of that report.”
6. The CPIN 2025 states at paragraph 6.7.5 that
“The Iraqi National ID card is an electronic biometric card issued by the Ministry of Interior, which holders are required to carry at all times. The National ID card is a credit card-sized plastic card with an embedded radio frequency identification (RFID) chip.
…
“The applicant must bring their current ID card, proof of citizenship, proof of residence, ration card, and the fee. The civil status office will retain these documents, which will be invalidated when the new card is issued. All applicants must attend the office in person for the photo, iris scan and fingerprint registration.”
7. At paragraph 6.7.9 the CPIN 2025 states:
“On 19 January 2023, the Iraqi Embassy in London confirmed that the process for renewing an INID can be commenced from the UK but would need to be retrieved by a person acting as power of attorney, who would then send the INID to the UK or meet the returnee on arrival with the renewed INID.”
…
“It should also be noted the process to assign power of attorney from the UK requires the person to attend the Iraqi Embassy and show some other form of ID.”
8. The CPIN 2025 states at paragraph 6.17.2 that Dr Fatah in a review of the previous CPIN on civil documentation and returns stated:
“In order to grant power of attorney from the UK, if the person is from the IKR, they can do so by visiting the KRG office in London. They would need some sort of ID and the details of the person that they want to represent them in the IKR. The representatives ID details are not required. The application will then be approved by the KRG public relations office before being taken to court for another approval. Only then will power of attorney be granted, and it will only be valid inside the IKR. However, if the application takes place in the Iraqi consulate in London, it can be used throughout Iraq. Again, the person would need some form of ID, British or Iraqi, and the details of the person that they wish to represent them.”

The appellant’s evidence
9. Mr Ahmad did not make an application that the appellant was unfit to give evidence but drew my attention to the psychiatric report. The appellant’s evidence was relatively short and he did not require a break. The appellant confirmed he understood the interpreter and the procedure on appeal. I am satisfied that the appellant understood the questions put to him and he was able to participate in the proceedings.
10. The appellant relied on his statements which were before the FTT. He had no Iraqi documentation in the UK because it was taken by the agent. The appellant refers to the agent as smugglers. The appellant had attended the Iraqi Embassy in Manchester about a month ago. He was told that, if he cannot provide his birth certificate (Tazkira) or other documentation to prove his identity, they could not do anything for him. They spoke to him at the Embassy and showed him a piece of paper written in Arabic and Kurdish about what was required. The appellant confirmed that he had requested an ID card at the Embassy but they could not give him one because he did not have proof of his identity. He was shown a piece of paper and he took a photograph of it on his phone. He had no contact with his family in Iraq and was last in contact with his cousin before he left Iraq.
11. In cross-examination, he was asked if he told the people at the Embassy in Manchester that he had an INID while in Iraq. The appellant replied that they did not ask him many questions. He said he wanted to apply and they asked if he had any evidence and he said no. It was put to him that he did not tell the Embassy staff that he had already been issued with an INID whilst he was living in Iraq. He replied that, back in Iraq, he only had one document, a Tazkira. He had no other documents. He was asked why he said he had an INID in his substantive interview and he said, “I do not truly know what is INID. I had an Iraqi birth certificate and I assume that is INID.” The appellant confirmed at the end of the hearing that he only had a birth certificate, Tazkira, and this was taken by the smugglers.
12. Mrs Nolan asked the appellant if he had requested a replacement ID from the Embassy. He stated that they asked if he had any document to show who he was and he told them it was taken from him. They said they could not do anything. The appellant stated his wife was not in contact with her brother in Iraq or her brother in Germany. When asked why, the appellant stated, “It is her issue.” The appellant and his wife had not been in touch with any family members since they left Iraq because they were so frightened.
13. In answer to questions from me, the appellant stated that he had no contact with any relatives in Iraq since he left. One of his cousins had arranged the smugglers who brought him to the UK. He had tried to get in touch with his cousin but could not. He had asked other people for a contact number.
14. In re-examination the appellant was asked if he had his fingerprints and photograph taken in Iraq and he replied that his birth certificate is paper and they took a photograph of it and fingerprinted him. The ID was plastic and different to the birth certificate. He was asked if it looked like a credit card with a chip and pin. He produced his UK identity document and stated his Iraqi document was not plastic and it did not have a biometric chip.

Respondent’s submissions
15. Mrs Nolan submitted that the appellant had stated and confirmed in his substantive interview that he had an INID and also a driving licence in Iraq. The appellant’s case before the FTT was that he had done his biometrics in Iraq and had an INID which he had given to the agent. The FTT’s findings on this issue were preserved. The appellant’s account before the UT lacked credibility and is an attempt to bolster his claim that he is unable to obtain a replacement INID. The appellant claimed that he only had a Tazkira but this was inconsistent with his previous evidence that he had an INID and a driving licence. It was the appellant’s evidence before the FTT that the agent had taken his passport and INID.
16. Mrs Nolan submitted it is not credible that the appellant had no contact with his cousin who had arranged the agent or that his wife had no contact with her family. The appellant had relatives in Iraq who can assist him to obtain identity documents. In any event, the appellant can obtain a replacement INID from the Embassy in the UK. There was no evidence of the photograph the appellant claimed to have taken at the Embassy in Manchester and it was apparent from the CB 2026 and the CPIN 2025 that there is a procedure whereby the appellant can obtain a replacement INID by obtaining a police report and appointing a proxy. The appellant can reasonably obtain an INID and relocate to Erbil or Mosul.

Appellant’s submissions
17. Mr Ahmad did not rely on the skeleton argument dated 14 September 2026 by Mohsin Saeed because it relied on country guidance which had been set aside. Mr Ahmad relied on the skeleton argument before the FTT and submitted that the appellant would be the subject of an enforced return to Baghdad. He would need an INID to travel to the KRI and pass through checkpoints. The CB 2026 is unclear as to which documents the appellant would have to produce at the Iraqi Embassy in London to obtain an INID. The CB 2026 corroborated the appellant’s evidence that he is unable to obtain an INID because he does not have any documents to prove his identity.
18. Mr Ahmad submitted the appellant had never had a plastic ID card, but even if he had, he could only get a replacement if he has some form of identity document. It was accepted he did not and he could not appoint a power of attorney or proxy following SMO2 at [130] which contradicted paragraph 6.7.9 of the CPIN 2025 relied on by the respondent. It was apparent from paragraph 3.2.3 of the CPIN 2025 that family members could not obtain documentation on the appellant’s behalf.

Findings and conclusions
19. I do not find the appellant’s account given in oral evidence before me to be credible for the reasons given below. It is significantly different to the account given in his substantive interview and in oral evidence before the FTT. Prior to the hearing before me, the appellant’s case has been advanced on the basis he had obtained an INID in Iraq which was taken by the agent along with his passport. The appellant now claims that he has never had a plastic biometric ID card and the only document he ever had was a paper copy of an Iraqi birth certificate, Tazkira, which was taken by the agent.
20. At question 40 of his substantive interview, the appellant was asked the following questions and he gave the following replies:
Do you have an Iraq ID such as an INID card?
“Yes I have an INID.”
Do you have it here in the UK?
“No because the agent took all our ID and passport from us as well.”
Did you have an INID when you were in Iraq?
“Certainly yes”
Do you have a driving licence with you in UK?
“In my country yes but not here with me.”
21. The appellant’s claim that he did not know what an INID card was and assumed it was a Tazkira is not credible given his answers in interview. No complaint has been raised as to the interpretation in interview and the appellant’s oral evidence before the FTT was consistent with that given in interview. The appellant made numerous corrections to the interview record but he did not amend his answers to question 40. I find the appellant has changed his account in an attempt to support his claim that he is unable to obtain an INID. I do not accept that the only identity document the appellant had was his Tazkira or that he brought it to the UK and it was taken by the agent/smugglers. I rely on the preserved findings of the FTT that the appellant had done his biometrics in Iraq and had been issued with an INID which was subsequently taken by the agent.
22. The appellant did not provide a witness statement or documentation to support his account that he had attended the Iraqi Embassy in Manchester about a month ago. The bundle of documents before me was the same as that before the UT at the error of law hearing. It was the appellant’s case before me that he did not tell the staff at the Embassy in Manchester that he had obtained an INID card in Iraq. There is a procedure to enable the appellant to obtain a replacement INID which he did not follow.
23. I find the appellant has given his biometric data to the authorities in Iraq and he was issued with an INID. His Iraqi passport and INID were taken by the agent. The appellant can apply for a replacement INID at the Iraqi Embassy in the London.
24. Further or alternatively, I do not find it credible that the appellant has had no contact with his family given his cousin helped him to leave Iraq and travel to the UK. There was insufficient evidence to show that the appellant had tried to contact his family and was unable to do so because the appellant’s account given in oral evidence before me was not credible for the reasons given above. The appellant has a UK identity card with which he could prove his identity and obtain power of attorney if one was required (see [8] above).
25. Accordingly, I find, applying the lower standard, that the appellant has failed to show that he is unable to obtain a replacement INID. He has not visited the Iraqi Embassy in London and followed the procedure available to him. The appellant has previously held an INID and he has the ability to obtain a replacement to enable him to safely internally relocate in Iraq. I dismiss the appellant’s appeal.

Notice of Decision
Appeal dismissed

J Frances

Judge of the Upper Tribunal
Immigration and Asylum Chamber

25 September 2026