A Nigerian actress and model is seeking asylum in the UK, insisting her ‘celebrity status’ puts her at risk of harm back home because of her celebrity status. The woman, who was granted anonymity, argued that her fame would put her at more risk of harm if she were deported because she coordinated and attended a demonstration in October 2020 in support of the “End SARS Movement”. According to Mail Online, she made a human rights claim after arriving in Britain, claiming she is a ‘well-known model and actress’ who took part in political activism in Nigeria. Despite initially being denied by the Home Office as she lied about her salary on her VISA application, an immigration judge said that her case needs to be reheard as the facts were not analysed as a whole. The Nigerian woman, known only as OO, made a protection and human rights claim in November 2021, which was refused by the Home Office in November 2023. She claimed that because she coordinated and attended a demonstration hoping to end the Special Anti-Robbery Squad (SARS), she would be at risk upon returning home. A judgment said: ‘The essence of [her] protection claim… was that she has a well-founded fear of harm on return to Nigeria because she coordinated and attended a demonstration in October 2020 in support of the “End SARS Movement”. ‘The consequent risk to her safety is enhanced by the fact that she is a well-known model and actress in Nigeria and the daughter of a local politician.’ The court heard of her claims that she had a ‘celebrity status’ in Nigeria, but her accounts of this were said to be ‘vague and limited’. However, it was found that she made false claims regarding her salary on her UK VISA application form. Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge David Kelly accepted that she had failed to be classed as a vulnerable witness and that the previous judge may have failed to believe her testimony, but said these were not sufficient to overturn the decision. There was, however, a lack of evidence on whether she would continue political action when she returned, and therefore be at risk of persecution. Questions were also raised about the way in which the evidence had been analysed as a whole, which was judged to be enough to be classed as an error in law. The claim was therefore sent back to the First-Tier Tribunal to be reheard in front of a different judge. Judge Kelly, sitting at the Upper Tribunal, said: ‘It seems to me to be axiomatic that a fact-finder must not reach his or her conclusion before surveying all the evidence relevant thereto. ‘Just as, if I may take a banal if alliterative example, one cannot make a cake with only one ingredient, so also frequently one cannot make a case, in the sense of establishing its truth, otherwise than by a combination of a number of pieces of evidence. ‘Whilst it is true that the expert did not expressly comment upon the plausibility of [OO’s] account of events by reference to the background country information, this did not relieve the judge of the obligation to do so. ‘It may have been, for example, that having considered the detail of the external evidence concerning the End SARS protests, the judge would have concluded that material aspects of that evidence were inconsistent with [OO’s] account of them, thereby undermining the overall credibility of her claim. ‘On the other hand, the judge may have concluded that the details contained within the external evidence supported the plausibility of her account of events, thereby enhancing its overall credibility. ‘Given that the judge did not conduct this exercise, it is impossible now to say that the error of law I have identified was immaterial to the outcome of the appeal. ‘I have accordingly concluded that the judge’s findings must be set aside in their entirety and the matter remitted for a complete rehearing.’The post Nigerian actress’ seeking asylum in Britain, claims her ‘celebrity status’ back home is putting her life at risk after taking part in “End SARS Movement”. appeared first on TIME.I.NG.
A Nigerian actress and model is seeking asylum in the UK, insisting her ‘celebrity status’ puts her at risk of harm back home because of her celebrity status. The woman, who was granted anonymity, argued that her fame would put her at more risk of harm if she were deported because she coordinated and attended a demonstration in October 2020 in support of the “End SARS Movement”. According to Mail Online, she made a human rights claim after arriving in Britain, claiming she is a ‘well-known model and actress’ who took part in political activism in Nigeria. Despite initially being denied by the Home Office as she lied about her salary on her VISA application, an immigration judge said that her case needs to be reheard as the facts were not analysed as a whole. The Nigerian woman, known only as OO, made a protection and human rights claim in November 2021, which was refused by the Home Office in November 2023. She claimed that because she coordinated and attended a demonstration hoping to end the Special Anti-Robbery Squad (SARS), she would be at risk upon returning home. A judgment said: ‘The essence of [her] protection claim… was that she has a well-founded fear of harm on return to Nigeria because she coordinated and attended a demonstration in October 2020 in support of the “End SARS Movement”. ‘The consequent risk to her safety is enhanced by the fact that she is a well-known model and actress in Nigeria and the daughter of a local politician.’ The court heard of her claims that she had a ‘celebrity status’ in Nigeria, but her accounts of this were said to be ‘vague and limited’. However, it was found that she made false claims regarding her salary on her UK VISA application form. Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge David Kelly accepted that she had failed to be classed as a vulnerable witness and that the previous judge may have failed to believe her testimony, but said these were not sufficient to overturn the decision. There was, however, a lack of evidence on whether she would continue political action when she returned, and therefore be at risk of persecution. Questions were also raised about the way in which the evidence had been analysed as a whole, which was judged to be enough to be classed as an error in law. The claim was therefore sent back to the First-Tier Tribunal to be reheard in front of a different judge. Judge Kelly, sitting at the Upper Tribunal, said: ‘It seems to me to be axiomatic that a fact-finder must not reach his or her conclusion before surveying all the evidence relevant thereto. ‘Just as, if I may take a banal if alliterative example, one cannot make a cake with only one ingredient, so also frequently one cannot make a case, in the sense of establishing its truth, otherwise than by a combination of a number of pieces of evidence. ‘Whilst it is true that the expert did not expressly comment upon the plausibility of [OO’s] account of events by reference to the background country information, this did not relieve the judge of the obligation to do so. ‘It may have been, for example, that having considered the detail of the external evidence concerning the End SARS protests, the judge would have concluded that material aspects of that evidence were inconsistent with [OO’s] account of them, thereby undermining the overall credibility of her claim. ‘On the other hand, the judge may have concluded that the details contained within the external evidence supported the plausibility of her account of events, thereby enhancing its overall credibility. ‘Given that the judge did not conduct this exercise, it is impossible now to say that the error of law I have identified was immaterial to the outcome of the appeal. ‘I have accordingly concluded that the judge’s findings must be set aside in their entirety and the matter remitted for a complete rehearing.’The post Nigerian actress’ seeking asylum in Britain, claims her ‘celebrity status’ back home is putting her life at risk after taking part in “End SARS Movement”. appeared first on TIME.I.NG.