Krasniqi v Secretary Of State For the Home Department

In assessing an asylum claim based on mixed ethnicity, the tribunal must determine whether the individual applicant faces a reasonable likelihood of persecution on return. General evidence that Roma or persons of mixed ethnicity may face discrimination or violence does not establish that every person in that category is at risk. The assessment must take account of the applicant’s particular circumstances, including family background, the experiences of close relatives, integration within the relevant community, language and perceived ethnicity, and any past treatment. Evidence concerning siblings with the same family background may be more probative than general statistics because it permits a comparison between substantially similar individuals. An appellate court should intervene only where the tribunal’s conclusion was not reasonably open to it.

The appellant, a Kosovo national of mixed Albanian and Roma ethnicity, claimed asylum on the basis that he feared persecution if returned to Kosovo. His claim was refused by the Secretary of State. A Special Adjudicator rejected the appeal, and the Immigration Appeal Tribunal dismissed his further appeal, focusing on whether his mixed ethnicity created a risk against which UNMIK, KFOR and the local authorities could not provide adequate protection.

Before the Court of Appeal, the appellant argued that the Tribunal had understated the position of Roma and persons of mixed ethnicity after the Kosovo conflict and had failed properly to assess the documentary evidence. The central issue was whether, on the evidence concerning this particular appellant, there was a reasonable likelihood that he would suffer persecution for a Convention reason on return.

Appeal dismissed. Lord Justice Aldous gave the principal judgment. Lord Justice Keene and Sir Christopher Slade agreed.

1. The IAT had somewhat understated the general problems experienced by Roma and persons of mixed ethnicity in Kosovo after mid-1999. It had nevertheless understood that such persons could face discrimination, violence and inadequate protection.
2. The decisive question was the individual appellant’s risk, not the general position of Roma or persons of mixed ethnicity. The fact of mixed parentage did not itself establish a reasonable likelihood of persecution. Each case depended on its particular circumstances, including whether the applicant was recognised as Roma, appearance, language, accent and family circumstances.
3. The IAT was entitled to rely substantially on the appellant’s immediate family. His siblings remained in Kosovo without evidence of persecution based on their ethnic origin, and the wider family was integrated and prominent within the Albanian community. Those facts were relevant evidence of the appellant’s likely treatment on return.
4. General statistics could not displace the probative value of evidence from persons sharing the appellant’s family background and origin. The relevant comparison was between substantially similar individuals, rather than between the appellant and the wider population.
5. The evidence did not show that all persons of mixed ethnic origin were persecuted. The appellant considered himself Albanian, had no identified language or accent difficulty, and his family had actively opposed the Serbs. The Tribunal was entitled to conclude that he had not established a reasonable likelihood of Convention persecution.

Lord Justice Keene added that, despite the IAT’s understatement of the general position, its assessment of the appellant’s individual circumstances was unassailable. The appeal was dismissed, with detailed assessment of the appellant’s Community Legal Funding Certificate.

1. Court of Appeal (Civil Division): Appeal dismissed.
2. Immigration Appeal Tribunal: Appeal dismissed on 27 June 2001.
3. Special Adjudicator: Appeal against the Secretary of State’s refusal of asylum rejected.
4. Secretary of State for the Home Department: Asylum application refused by letter dated 10 June 2000.