140 McLaughlin College Senior Common Room
Presented by John Campbell
Among the tasks facing the judges who decide legal claims is the difficult problem of assessing and evaluating the evidence submitted to the court by the parties in the dispute. This paper investigates this problem as it arises in the assessment of asylum claims heard in the United Kingdom. I draw on the work of Jones (1994) and Redmayne (2001) on the role of ‘experts’ in the legal process, and the work of Jasanoff (2006) on the limits of scientific evidence in the legal process to examine how British Judges assess expert evidence submitted to the United Kingdom Immigration and Asylum Chamber. Though an examination of decisions in the First Tier Tribunal and in the Upper Tribunal (specifically ‘Country Guidance’ cases), I identify a number of substantive and procedural problems which arise in the way that immigration judges assess and evaluate evidence which undermines due process and which prevents asylum applicants from securing protection.
JOHN CAMPBELL is an Emeritus Reader in the Anthropology of Law and Africa at the School of Oriental Studies, London; he is also a Research Affiliate at the Centre for Socio-Legal Studies, Oxford University, and is attached to an ERC-funded project called 'Euro-Expert' directed by Professor Livia Holden. In addition to undertaking fieldwork in Ghana, Ethiopia, Tanzania and Botswana, he has undertaken ESRC-funded fieldwork in the UK on the British Asylum System. He has published numerous papers and several books including Nationalism, Law and Statelessness. Grand Illusions in the Horn of Africa (Routledge, 2014) and Bureaucracy, Law and Dystopia in the UK's Asylum System (Routledge, 2017).
When: Wednesday, November 27, 2019 from Noon to 1:30 pm
Where: 140 McLaughlin College (SCR)
Poster: John Campbell_Poster_Nov. 27_19