(Immigration and Asylum Chamber) Appeal Number: AA/01982/2013
THE IMMIGRATION ACTS
Heard at Field House
On 17 October 2013
On 22 October 2013
UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE MOULDEN
MR S G
(Anonymity Direction Made)
SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
For the Appellant: Ms E Daykin of counsel instructed by Blavo & Co solicitors
For the Respondent: Mr N Bramble a Senior Home Office Presenting Officer
DETERMINATION AND REASONS
26. The second ground of appeal argues that the judge erred in law by finding, in paragraph 42, that there was no reference to Amharic being spoken in Eritrea when there was a clear indication to the contrary in paragraph 19.04 of the COI report before him. This may be strictly correct but it is nothing to the point because it does not accurately represent the FTTJ's findings. Rather than rejecting the claim that Amharic was spoken in Eritrea in paragraph 42 the FTTJ accepted the evidence of Professor Patrick that Amharic was the official language of Eritrea until independence and that it was spoken by ethnic Eritreans who had lived in Ethiopian before being forced out. This ground does not identify any error of law.
27. The third ground of appeal submits that the judge erred in law by failing to place any weight on the evidence of the witness Mr T. It is argued that the FTTJ did so because the witness produced no evidence linking him to Eritrea or proving that he was an Eritrean citizen apart from his UK provisional driving licence. This ground also fails fully to reflect what the judge said, in this case in paragraph 48. The FTTJ found that Mr T was not a credible witness for more than this reason alone. He had given evidence in Amharic rather than one of the main Eritrean languages. There was no evidence to support his claims that he also spoke Arabic and Tigrinya. He had not produced any evidence linking him with Eritrea or proving that he was an Eritrean citizen. I note that in his witness statement the witness says nothing about his status in this country. It should not have been difficult for him to provide documentation to show his status whether as an asylum claimant, recognised refugee or in some other capacity. This ground does not identify any error of law.
28. I find that the FTTJ did not err in law. I uphold his determination.
29. The FTTJ made an anonymity direction which I repeat.
30. Unless and until a tribunal or court directs otherwise, the appellant is granted anonymity. No report of these proceedings shall directly or indirectly identify him or any member of his family. This direction applies both to the appellant and to the respondent. Failure to comply with this direction could lead to contempt of court proceedings.
Signed Date 19 October 2013
Upper Tribunal Judge Moulden