[balti]

The first question the decision maker must consider is whether the person
genuinely is an Ahmadi.

i. Country information in this Note is consistent withthe country guidance case MN and others (Ahmadis – country conditions -risk) Pakistan CG [2012] UKUT 389 (IAC) (14 November 2012), heard on 26, 27, 29 March, 28, 31 May and 20 June 2012. In this case the Upper Tribunalheld that:

• decision makers must reach their conclusions based on all the evidence
as a whole giving such weight to aspects of that evidence as appropriate.
This is likely to include enquiring whether the claimant was registered
with an Ahmadi community in Pakistan and worshipped and engaged
there on a regular basis (paragraph 122) (see Ahmadi community in
Pakistan – Registration);

• post-arrival activity will also be relevant. Evidence likely to be relevant
includes confirmation from the UK Ahmadi headquarters [Ahmadiyya
Muslim Association UK] regarding the activities relied on in Pakistan and
confirmation from the local community in the UK where the claimant is
worshipping (paragraph 122) (see Verification process); and,

• a sur place claim by an Ahmadi based on post-arrival conversion or
revival in belief and practice will require careful evidential analysis. This
will probably include consideration of evidence of the head of the
claimant’s local United Kingdom Ahmadi Community and from the UK
headquarters [Ahmadiyya Muslim Association UK – AMA UK], the latter
particularly in cases where there has been a conversion. Any adverse
findings in the claimant’s account as a whole may be relevant to the
assessment of likely behaviour on return (paragraph 126) (see
Verification process and Ahmadi converts).

2.1.2 In the reported case of AB (Ahmadiyya Association UK: letters) Pakistan
[2013] UKUT 511 (IAC) (18 September 2013), heard on 30 July 2013, the
Upper Tribunal concluded that in deciding a claim for international protection
based on a person’s Ahmadi faith where credibility is an issue, the more
specific information a letter from the Ahmadiyya Association UK contains, as
to the person’s activities in the United Kingdom, the more likely the letter is
to be given weight (paragraph 44).

2.1.3 The Ahmadiyya Muslim Association UK has a verification procedure to
establish whether a person is Ahmadi, and to validate incidents that may
have occurred to them in Pakistan (see Verification process).

2.1.4 For further guidance on assessing credibility, see the asylum policy guidance
on Assessing Credibility and Refugee Status.

2.1.5 Decision makers must also check if there has been a previous application for
a UK visa or another form of leave. Asylum applications matched to visas
should be investigated prior to the asylum interview (see the asylum policy
guidance on Visa Matches, Asylum Claims from UK Visa Applicants).

2.1.6 Decision makers should also consider the need to conduct language
analysis testing (see the asylum policy guidance on Language Analysis).
Back to Contents

2.2 Exclusion

2.2.1 Decision makers must consider whether one (or more) of the exclusion
clauses is applicable. Each case must be considered on its individual facts
and merits.

2.2.2 For further guidance on the exclusion clauses and restricted leave, see the
Asylum Instruction on Exclusion: Article 1F of the Refugee Convention and
the Asylum Instruction on Restricted Leave.
Back to Contents

2.3 Convention reason

2.3.1 Actual or imputed religion.

2.3.2 Establishing a convention reason alone is not sufficient to be recognised as
a refugee. The question to be addressed in each case is whether the
particular person will face a real risk of persecution on account of their actual
or imputed convention reason.

2.3.3 For further guidance on Convention reasons and particular social groups,
see the Asylum Instruction on Assessing Credibility and Refugee Status.
Back to Contents

2.4 Assessment of risk
a. Treatment by the state

2.4.1 In MN and others, the Upper Tribunal held that:
• The background to the risk faced by Ahmadis is legislation that restricts
the way in which they are able openly to practise their faith. The
legislation not only prohibits preaching and other forms of proselytising
but also in practice restricts other elements of manifesting one's religious
beliefs, such as holding open discourse about religion with non-Ahmadis,
although not amounting to proselytising. The prohibitions include openly
referring to one's place of worship as a mosque and to one's religious
leader as an Imam. In addition, Ahmadis are not permitted to refer to the
call to prayer as azan nor to call themselves Muslims or refer to their faith
as Islam. Sanctions include a fine and imprisonment and if blasphemy is
found, there is a risk of the death penalty which to date has not been
Page 8 of 76
carried out although there is a risk of lengthy incarceration if the penalty
is imposed (paragraph 119i). (See Legal rights, Ahmadi community in
Pakistan and Proselytising, and also the Country Policy and Information
Note Pakistan: Prison conditions).

• It is, and has long been, possible in general for Ahmadis to practise their
faith on a restricted basis either in private or in community with other
Ahmadis, without infringing domestic Pakistan law (paragraph 119ii).
(See Legal rights and Ahmadi community in Pakistan).
2.4.2 The situation for Ahmadis in Pakistan has not changed significantly since
MN and others was heard and, in general, this caselaw still applies,
(modified by the Court of Appeal judgement WA (Pakistan) 6 March 2019 –
see below).
2.4.3 In assessing the evidence before them, the Upper Tribunal in MN and others
held that ‘Ahmadis are an oppressed religious minority in Pakistan. The
relevant provisions of the Pakistan Penal Code […] restrict the ways in which
Ahmadis are able to express and practise their beliefs. If defied, the
provisions expose Ahmadis to the risk of prosecution coupled with a risk of
detention pending trial’ (paragraph 101).

2.4.4 Ahmadis continue to face a high level of official discrimination and remain
the subject of legislation that denies them basic rights, including the right to
be recognised as Muslims. Ahmadis may be punished for preaching or
‘insulting the religious feelings’ of other Muslims, leaving them open to
official punishment for ‘blasphemy’. In 2017, 3 Ahmadis were sentenced to
death for blasphemy and at least 9 Ahmadis were imprisoned for their faith
(see Legal rights and State treatment and attitudes).



2.4.5 Anti-Ahmadi rhetoric by public officials has been reported in 2016 and 2017,
and the government failed to restrict advertisements or speeches inciting
anti-Ahmadi violence in television and print media. There are reports of
police entering Ahmadi places of worship to remove signs of the Islamic
faith, demolishing or sealing mosques, or giving them to non-Ahmadi imams
and their communities. A group of Ahmadis, who were arrested in 2016 for
publishing banned Ahmadi magazines, claimed that police had tortured them
(see State treatment and attitudes and Societal treatment and attitudes –
Anti-Ahmadi violence).

2.4.6 In MN and others the Upper Tribunal held that:
• if an Ahmadi is able to demonstrate that it is of particular importance to
his religious identity to practise and manifest his faith openly in Pakistan
in defiance of the restrictions in the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) under
sections 298B and 298C, by engaging in behaviour described in
[paragraph 2.3.1 above], he or she is likely to be in need of protection, in
the light of the serious nature of the sanctions that potentially apply as
well as the risk of prosecution under section 295C for blasphemy
(paragraph 120i). (See Legal rights and Ahmadiyya community in
Pakistan – Culture and activities and Proselytising);

• an Ahmadi for whom it is of particular importance to their religious identity
to practise and manifest their faith openly in Pakistan should not be
Page 9 of 76
expected to avoid engaging in such behaviour to avoid a risk of
prosecution (paragraph 120ii) (see Ahmadiyya community in Pakistan –
Culture and activities and Proselytising);

2.4.7 In WA (Pakistan) 6 March 2019, heard 30 and 31 January 2019, the Court of
Appeal, referring to MN and others, found (paragraph 60):
‘i) Is the Claimant genuinely an Ahmadi? In answering that question the
guidance set out in paragraph 5 of the headnote [paragraph 122 of main
body] in MN is well expressed.

2.4.8 However, WA goes on to consider the rest of the headnote, paragraph 6
[123 of main body] in particular, and stated:
‘ii) The next step involves an inquiry into the Claimant’s behaviour if he or
she is returned to Pakistan. Will he or she actually behave in such a way as
to attract persecution? In answering that question, the decision-maker will
again consider all the evidence and will, where appropriate, expressly
consider whether the behaviour claimed by the asylum-seeker is genuinely
an expression of their religious belief and is an authentic account of the way
they will behave if returned.

‘iii) If the decision-maker’s conclusion is that the Claimant, if returned to
Pakistan, will avoid behaviour which would attract persecution, then the
decision-maker must ask the question why that would be so. Many
possibilities arise. The individual may genuinely wish to live quietly, and
would do so whether or not repression existed in relation to the expression of
his or her Ahmadi faith. The individual may have mixed motives for such
behaviour. If such a quiet expression or manifestation of genuine Ahmadi
belief is merely the result of established cultural norms or social pressures,
then it is unlikely there will be a basis for asylum. However, if a material
reason (and not necessarily the only reason) for such behaviour will be to
avoid persecution, then it is likely that the Claimant will have a valid claim for
asylum. There is no requirement that public expression of Ahmadi religious
faith, of a kind which is likely to attract persecution, should be of “particular
importance” to the Claimant. Such a requirement is inconsistent with the test
as laid down in HJ (Iran)’ (paragraph 60).

2.4.9 WA concluded ‘To that extent, the guidance given in the body of MN
(Ahmadis) Pakistan CG and in the headnote is misleading and should not be
followed’ (paragraph 61).

2.4.10 Decision makers should therefore, when considering a claim from an Ahmadiwho says he or she will chose to live quietly on return to Pakistan, ask why
would that person chose to do that? If it is because they fear that any
outward indication of their faith would cause them to come to the adverse
attention of the authorities then it is likely they would qualify for asylum.

2.4.11 The Upper Tribunal also found, from the evidence before them, that:
‘The ability of Ahmadis to defend any prosecution that may ensue after faithbased FIRs have been issued under the PPC, is hampered by the risk of
unfair treatment by the police and the trial courts. These problems relate not
only to the substance of any prosecution but also the ability of Ahmadis to
readily obtain bail prior to or after proceedings have been brought. […] On
Page 10 of 76 the other hand Ahmadis can be reasonably confident that on appeal to higher courts unfair or unreasonable decisions are likely to be overturned’
(paragraph 102). (See State treatment and attitudes – Police and judiciary).

2.4.12 Religious practice for the Ahmadiyya community is centred around strong
oral and written traditions, with a distinctive emphasis on performance of
religious practices. As the law prohibits Ahmadis from propagating, openly
expressing and manifesting the Islamic nature of their faith, Ahmadis who
discuss Ahmadiyyat with non-Ahmadis face the risk of being reported to the
authorities. The distinguishing attire worn by Ahmadi women may be seen as
a form of proselytising, which may result in discrimination and legal
repercussions (see Legal rights, Ahmadiyya community in Pakistan – Culture
and activities and Proselytising, and Societal treatment and attitudes –
Women).

2.4.13 Ahmadis who openly practise their faith (beyond the restricted basis
permitted by domestic law) are liable to prosecution under the anti-Ahmadi
and blasphemy laws and are likely to be in need of protection. Anti-terror
legislation has also been used to target Ahmadis. Each case must, however,
be considered on its facts with the onus on the person to demonstrate that
they would be at real risk from the state authorities on return.

2.4.14 For further guidance on assessing risk, see the Asylum Instruction on
Assessing Credibility and Refugee Status and, in regard to women, Gender
issues in the asylum claim.
Back to Contents
b. Societal treatment

2.4.15 In MN and others the Upper Tribunal held that there is clear evidence that
anti-Ahmadi legislation is used by non-state actors to threaten and harass
Ahmadis. This includes the filing of First Information Reports (FIRs) (the first
step in any criminal proceedings) which can result in detentions whilst
prosecutions are being pursued. Ahmadis are also subject to attacks by nonstate actors from sectors of the majority Sunni Muslim population (paragraph
119i). (See also Legal rights, Societal treatment and attitudes and State
treatment and attitudes).

2.4.16 The Upper Tribunal found, from the evidence it was provided, that:
‘[Ahmadis] face hostility from sectors of the majority of society which is made
up of Sunni Muslims. Disagreement with and disapproval of the beliefs of
Ahmadis has intensified with the increased Islamisation of Pakistan as well
as the growth of fundamentalism. In addition to vulnerability to terrorist
threats from the Taliban, they face vehement opposition from the Khatme-eNabuwat whose tactics not only include taking out FIRs against Ahmadis but
also intimidation. Their influence is pervasive in Pakistani institutions’
(paragraph 101). (See also Societal treatment and attitudes).

2.4.17 For more information on First Information Reports (FIRs), see the Country
Policy and Information Note, Pakistan: background information, including
actors of protection, and internal relocation.
2.4.18 Several targeted attacks against Ahmadis were reported in 2017. An Ahmadi
lawyer was killed by terrorists in March 2017. Another example is the April
Page 11 of 76

2017 lynching of a university student, accused of promoting the Ahmadi
faith, and thus of blasphemy. Two Ahmadis were killed and another injured
in a mob attack on an Ahmadi house of worship in Chakwal, Punjab, in
December 2016 (see Societal treatment and attitudes – Anti-Ahmadi
violence).

2.4.19 Societal discrimination and hate speech/propaganda against the Ahmadi
community is widespread. Hate speech is often uncritically published by the
media. As well as targeted attacks and blasphemy allegations, Ahmadi
property and places of worship have been destroyed or desecrated (see
Societal treatment and attitudes – Discrimination and harassment and AntiAhmadi violence).

2.4.20 Ahmadis are subject to exclusion from non-Ahmadi shops and businesses.
Ahmadis are routinely harassed and discriminated against in schools and
educational institutions, and in their places of employment. Some Ahmadis
are reluctant to reveal their faith on account of this (see Ahmadi community
in Pakistan, Societal treatment and attitudes – Discrimination and
harassment and Discrimination in education and employment).

2.4.21 Due to their distinctive dress, Ahmadi women may be at greater risk of
discrimination and harassment than men (see Ahmadi community in
Pakistan – Ahmadi dress and identifying behaviours and Societal treatment
and attitudes – Women).

2.4.22 The Upper Tribunal held, in MN and others, that there is no basis for
considering that Ahmadi women as a whole are at a particular or additional
risk; the decision that they should not attend mosques in Pakistan was made
by the Ahmadi Community following attacks on the mosques in Lahore in
2010. There is no evidence that women in particular were the target of those
attacks (paragraph 121) (see Societal treatment and attitudes – Women).

2.4.23 A person who converts to another faith or who is seen to renounce Islam in
any other way can be targeted for blasphemy, which carries the death
sentence. Pakistani society in general is extremely hostile to converts, with
reports of converts being harassed, attacked and tortured (see Blasphemy
laws and Ahmadi converts).

2.4.24 Societal treatment and attitudes towards Ahmadis are may reach the
threshold of persecution and/or serious harm, depending on its nature and
repetition. Decision makers must consider whether there are particular
factors relevant to the specific person which might make the treatment
serious by its nature and repetition.

2.4.25 For further guidance on assessing risk, see the Asylum Instruction on
Assessing Credibility and Refugee Status and, in regard to women, Gender
issues in the asylum claim.



2.5 Protection

2.5.1 Where the person’s fear is of persecution and/or serious harm by the state,
they will not be able to avail themselves of the protection of the authorities.
Page 12 of 76

2.5.2 Where the person’s fear is of persecution and/or serious harm by non-state
actors, decision makers must assess whether the state can provide effective
protection.

2.5.3 Inconsistent safeguarding of, and official discrimination against Ahmadis
persists. Whilst the authorities took steps to protect some individuals from
unfounded accusations of blasphemy, lower courts continue to fail to adhere
to basic evidentiary standards in blasphemy cases (see State treatment and
attitudes – Targeting on religious grounds).

2.5.4 There are reports that the police are, at times, ineffective or unwilling to
protect the Ahmadi community from violence, or investigate crimes
committed against them. The perpetrators of violence against religious and
sectarian minorities are rarely apprehended and sentenced. There is a
pattern of appeasement amongst the police of, and in some cases collusion
with, religious extremists pursuing hate campaigns against the community
(see State treatment and attitudes – – Police and judiciary).

2.5.5 Ahmadis may be reluctant to report incidents to the police for fear of facing
arrest and prosecution under the anti-Ahmadi or blasphemy laws.
Additionally, Ahmadis consider the incidents as part of daily life and do not
regularly report them to their community leaders. There are reports that
some judges, under pressure from extremist clerics or lawyers, feel forced to
withdraw any favourable decisions towards Ahmadis, or delay or abandon
trials for fear of reprisals (see also Legal rights, Societal treatment and
attitudes, and State treatment and attitudes – Police and judiciary).

2.5.6 As a result, the state appears both unwilling and unable to offer effective
protection and the person will not be able to avail themselves of the
protection of the authorities.

2.5.7 For further guidance on assessing the availability of state protection, see the
asylum policy guidance on Assessing Credibility and Refugee Status and, in
regard to women, Gender issues in the asylum claim.
Back to Contents

2.6 Internal relocation

2.6.1 Where the person’s fear is of persecution and/or serious harm by the state,
they will not be able to relocate to escape that risk.

2.6.2 In MN and others the Upper Tribunal held that, in light of the nationwide
effect in Pakistan of the anti-Ahmadi legislation, the option of internal
relocation, previously considered to be available in Rabwah, is not in general
reasonably open to a person who genuinely wishes to practise and manifest
their faith openly in Pakistan contrary to the restrictions of the Pakistan Penal
Code (paragraph 124) (see Legal rights, Ahmadi community in Pakistan,
State treatment and attitudes and Societal treatment and attitudes).


2.6.3 Whilst some Ahmadis see Rabwah as a secure place, which allows a greater
level of freedom than other areas, daily life and routines are compromised
due to the underlying sense of threat. Ahmadis living in Rabwah may also
face threats from opponents who target the area because of the large
number of Ahmadis in the city. Anti-Ahmadi laws are equally applicable in
Page 13 of 76 Rabwah as they are in elsewhere in Pakistan (see Ahmadi community in Pakistan – Life in Rabwah and Legal rights).

2.6.4 Where the person’s fear is of ill-treatment at the hands of non-state actors,
they may be able to avoid this by moving elsewhere in Pakistan. Internal
relocation will only be possible if the risk is not present there and if it would
not be unreasonable to expect them to do so. In such cases decision makers
need to consider the relevance and reasonableness of internal relocation on
a case-by-case basis, taking full account of the individual circumstances of
the particular person. Where the risk stems from non-state actors
threatening to bring about legal action under anti-Ahmadi legislation, it is
unlikely that internal relocation will be possible.

2.6.5 For further guidance on internal relocation and the factors to be considered,
see the asylum policy guidance on Assessing Credibility and Refugee Status
and, in regard to women, Gender issues in the asylum claim.
Back to Contents

2.7 Certification

2.7.1 Where a claim is refused, it is unlikely to be certifiable as ‘clearly unfounded’
under section 94 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002.

2.7.2 For further guidance on certification, see Certification of Protection and
Human Rights claims under section 94 of the Nationality, Immigration and
Asylum Act 2002 (clearly unfounded claims)