This guide is maintained as a current resource for July 2026 and covers only the laws of England and Wales. Information is for general guidance, not legal advice. Consult a qualified solicitor for advice specific to your situation.
Learn how to prepare strong submissions on risk of persecution in UK asylum claims and appeals: understand legal tests, evidence requirements, country information, credibility assessments and practical steps to support refugee or humanitarian protection claims.
In UK asylum and protection claims, risk of persecution is a central legal question for both decision‑makers and tribunals. A claimant must demonstrate a well‑founded fear of persecution, serious harm or a real risk of serious harm if returned to their country of nationality or habitual residence. This article explains how submissions on risk of persecution should be prepared and presented in asylum applications and appeals, what evidence and legal reasoning are required, how UK law and tribunal procedures shape the process, and what practical steps claimants and their representatives can take to build compelling cases.
Legal Context: Refugee and Protection Law
Under the Immigration Rules and the Refugee Convention, the Home Office and immigration tribunals assess asylum claims to decide whether an applicant is a “refugee” or is entitled to humanitarian protection. A refugee is someone with a well‑founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion. Humanitarian protection may apply where there is a real risk of serious harm even if the specific refugee criteria are not met.
The test often used in tribunal decisions involves a structured inquiry into whether the claimant:
- Has a relevant characteristic (or one attributed by an actor of persecution) that could lead to persecution;
- Genuinely fears persecution as a result of that characteristic; and
- Faces a reasonable likelihood or real risk of persecution if returned.
The burden is on the claimant to substantiate the risk argument, but decision‑makers must assess this objectively and holistically, drawing on country information and factual evidence.
What Submissions on Risk Must Cover
Personal Evidence
A claimant's own account is essential. Written statements or testimony should explain:
- Who is feared as persecutors (state actors, militias, non‑state actors);
- The basis of risk (e.g. political opinion, ethnicity, sexuality);
- Personal history of harm, threats or discrimination;
- Why protection in the home state is ineffective or unsafe;
- Why the claimant cannot internally relocate to a safer area.
This narrative must be credible, coherent and supported, where possible, by documentation.
Documentary Evidence
Documentary evidence strengthens risk submissions:
- Identity and nationality documents;
- Medical reports showing effects of past harm;
- Police reports, affidavits or witness statements;
- Evidence of threats or persecution in the claimant's community;
- Country background information from reliable sources such as international organisation reports or expert evidence.
The Immigration Rules explicitly require decision‑makers to consider all relevant facts concerning both the personal circumstances and country conditions.
Country Information
Evidence about conditions in the claimant's country of origin is critical, particularly for objective assessment of risk. If there is applicable country guidance (decisions with “CG” status from the Upper Tribunal on specific issues), it is treated as authoritative and must be cited with explanation of its relevance. Parties must make clear when they rely on country information and how it relates to disputed issues, such as plausibility of the fear or the severity of harm.
Country information can come from:
- Upper Tribunal or country guidance;
- Reports by United Nations agencies (e.g. UNHCR) and NGOs;
- Expert witness reports.
Failure to properly link country material to personal circumstances can weaken risk submissions.
Legal Reasoning
Submissions must connect evidence to applicable legal standards. For refugee status, arguments should go beyond describing harm and explain why the risk rises to the level of persecution under the 1951 Convention. This may involve:
- Analysing whether harm is sufficiently serious and discriminatory;
- Demonstrating that harm is linked to a Convention ground or imputed characteristic;
- Showing why state protection is unavailable, ineffective, or dangerous.
For humanitarian protection, claimants must show a real risk of serious harm, which may include torture, inhuman treatment or indiscriminate violence.
Procedural Requirements and Tribunal Practice
Practice Directions and Preparation
The Practice Direction of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber requires appellants and their representatives to identify and focus on principal controversial issues early in the appeal process, including detailed submissions on risk of persecution. Tribunals expect properly indexed evidence bundles and clear country information schedules linking sources to disputed issues.
Expert evidence, such as country‑conditions reports or medical assessments, must meet professional standards and be verified by a statement of truth.
Assessing Credibility
Decision‑makers must assess credibility and reliability of evidence, considering whether the claimant's account is coherent, plausible and consistent with known country conditions. They also consider whether the applicant has made genuine efforts to substantiate their claim, and whether omissions are explained satisfactorily.
Addressing Gaps and Responding to Challenges
Missing Documentation
Where specific documents are unavailable (for example, due to fear of obtaining them in the home state), claimants should explain efforts made to obtain evidence and why it is unavailable. Immigration Rules allow cases to succeed even without documentary proof if the claimant has submitted all “material factors” available and given satisfactory explanations for any lack of evidence, and their statements are coherent and plausible.
Expert Evidence
Expert evidence can help explain complex country conditions or medical risks. Qualified expert reports add independent credibility to submissions on risk of persecution. Without such evidence, tribunals may struggle to assess nuanced risk issues.
Country Guidance
Where established country guidance applies, appellants should explain why their case is similar or, if necessary, why the guidance should not apply. A failure to engage with relevant country guidance or explain differences can be grounds for appeal on a point of law.
Practical Steps in Preparing Risk Submissions
- Start Early: Collect personal and supporting evidence as soon as possible.
- Stay Organised: Prepare a structured bundle with identity documents, statements, country information and expert reports.
- Focus on Legal Tests: Clearly link evidence to the legal criteria for refugee or humanitarian protection status.
- Explain Gaps: Where evidence is unavailable, provide credible explanations.
- Follow Tribunal Requirements: Comply with practice directions on format, timelines and identification of disputed issues.
Proper preparation strengthens the likelihood of a favourable outcome.
Common Questions
What counts as “persecution”?
Persecution generally includes serious harm or threats, such as violence or discrimination, linked to recognised Convention grounds. Whether harm amounts to persecution depends on severity, impact and the context.
Can risk be based on non‑state actors?
Yes. Harm by non‑state actors can constitute risk of persecution if the state is unable or unwilling to provide protection.
What if the claimant fears general violence?
General instability or indiscriminate violence may support humanitarian protection claims (rather than refugee claims) if there is evidence of real risk of serious harm.
Key Takeaways
Submissions on risk of persecution are a core part of asylum and protection claims in the UK. Effective submissions must:
- Present a clear narrative of personal risk;
- Provide documentary and country evidence linked to disputed issues;
- Explain how the evidence satisfies the legal tests for refugee status or humanitarian protection;
- Comply with tribunal practice directions and procedural requirements.
Claimants benefit from structured preparation, use of expert and country information, and focused legal reasoning. Attention to detail and clarity in linking evidence to legal tests significantly improves prospects of success in both initial decisions and tribunal appeals.
