HE (Bidoon – statelessness – risk of persecution) Kuwait CG  UKAIT 00051
Date of hearing: 22 March 2006
Date Determination notified: 21 June 2006
|Secretary of State for the Home Department||RESPONDENT|
Though there has been some progress in their situation, stateless Bidoon remain at risk of persecution and breach of their Article 3 rights in Kuwait. There has been no material change since BA and Others (Bidoon – statelessness – risk of persecution) Kuwait CG  UKIAT 00256 was decided.
'They live under the most appalling conditions, denied the right to travel, free medical care, to register marriages and in some cases to have a driving licence'.
'A reported determination of the Tribunal or one of the IAT bearing the letters "CG" shall be treated as an authoritative finding on the country guidance issue identified in the determination, based upon the evidence before the members of the Tribunal or the IAT that determined the appeal. As a result, unless it has been expressly superseded or replaced by any later 'CG' determination, or is inconsistent with the other authority that is binding on the Tribunal, such a country guidance case is authoritative in any subsequent appeal, so far as that appeal:
(a) relates to the country guidance issue in question; and
(b) depends upon the same or similar evidence.'
Though these recent improvements represent changes of clear relevance and may be indicative of an improving attitude on the part of the authorities towards the Bidoon, nevertheless there remain other significant problems to which we have referred above. There remain for example the difficulties, forming part of the appellant's case itself, of facing charges on account of not carrying an ID. In the appellant's case it is clear that the attendance card is not an identity card as it says as much on it. We do not agree that the birth certificate can properly be regarded as an identity card or indeed that it can be regarded as a civil identification document. It makes it clear that the appellant's parents are both non-Kuwaiti and it is, as Ms White suggested, really of little relevance. It would appear therefore that the appellant, like other undocumented Bidoon, is in a position where he would not be able to produce proper ID and would therefore always be at risk of charges of the kind that we accept had been brought against him being repeated. That is an aspect of the risk to undocumented Bidoon generally. We therefore conclude on the general issue that undocumented Bidoon still face such a level of discrimination in a range of ways in their lives in Kuwait, as to continue to be the victims of persecution. There has not been a material change since the country guidance decision in BA and accordingly we remain of the view that undocumented Bidoon are at risk as concluded in that determination. We should add, returning to the issue we raised at paragraph 31, that civil identification documents would include residence permits and other official papers issued by the Kuwaiti authorities, but would not include attendance cards such as that held by the appellant (which specified that it is not an identify card) or birth certificates where the parents were not Kuwaiti nationals or legal residents.
Senior Immigration Judge Allen
(1) USSD Country Report on Kuwait: 2005
(2) Home Office Operational Guidance Note on Kuwait : August 2005
(1) BA and Others (Bedoon – statelessness – risk of persecution) Kuwait CG  UKIAT 00256.