[1] The enforced return of the Appellant, a journalist, from the United Kingdom to his country of origin, Somalia, would expose him to a real risk of persecution on the ground of actual or imputed political opinion and/or a breach of his rights under Articles 2 and 3 ECHR.
[2] It is probable that, in the event of returning to Somalia, the Appellant will seek and find employment in the media sector.
[3] The Appellant is not to be denied refugee status on the ground that it would be open to him to seek to engage in employment other than in the media sector.
[4] Documents such as Home Office Country Information Guidance and Country of Information publications and kindred reports should not be forensically construed by the kind of exercise more appropriate to a contract, deed or other legal instrument. Reports of this kind are written by laymen, in laymen’s language, to be read and understood by laymen. Thus courts and tribunals should beware an overly formal or legalistic approach in construing them. Furthermore, reports of this type should be evaluated and construed in their full context,
[5] In cases where the Secretary of State seeks to withdraw a concession, or admission, the Tribunal should adopt a broad approach, taking into account in particular its inquisitorial jurisdiction, the public law overlay, the imperative of considering all relevant evidence and fairness to the litigant.
McCloskey P J, Dawson UTJ
[2015] UKUT 413 (IAC)
Bailii
England and Wales
Immigration
Updated: 27 December 2021; Ref: scu.551569