- BY Jamie Bell
The uncertain future for Afghan women seeking asylum
In my previous article, I outlined the precipitous fall in the rate of recognition for Afghan asylum claims following the change in the Home Office policy position in October 2024.
I noted that the immigration statistics indicated that 26 Afghan women had their asylum claims refused. It seemed unbelievable that the Home Office was refusing female asylum claims in the climate in which the Taliban are imposing increasing restrictions on women in Afghanistan.
However, shortly after the publication of that article, I was referred the case of an Afghan womens’ rights defender whose asylum claim had been refused. The Home Office found that she was not likely to attract adverse attention from the Taliban. It was also said that she could rely on a support network made up of contacts from her previous work with human rights organisations.
If a case as strong as ‘Mina’s can be refused, it seems likely that the Home Office are likely to continue to dismiss the asylum claims of women.
Now seems like a good time to review the current country guidance position, particularly as the Home Office have recently published updated immigration statistics which demonstrate a further fall in the Afghan recognition rate, to 44% with 1,542 grants and 1,960 refusals.
Background
Firstly, it is worth noting that there are not massive numbers of Afghan women claiming asylum in the UK, which is likely explained by the difficulties that Afghan women have in fleeing the country. In the period January to March 2025 there were 108 claims registered, while there were only 502 claims in the whole of 2024.
The most recently published statistics show that there were a further 20 refusals of claims brought by Afghan women as the main applicant, and 192 grants. By way of comparison, there were seven refusals in the first three quarters in 2024 and seven in 2023.
So the conclusion is that while the recognition rate for Afghan women is very high, the Home Office appears to believe that there are sustainable reasons to deny Afghan women asylum.
The position of the EU Agency for Asylum, UNHCR and the European Court of Justice
The European Agency for Asylum (formerly EASO) continue to publish helpful guidance notes annually for practitioners representing Afghan asylum seekers across Europe, the most recent of which (May 2024) states:
The accumulation of various measures introduced by the Taliban, which affect the rights and freedoms of women and girls in Afghanistan, amounts to persecution. Such measures affect their access to healthcare, work, freedom of movement, freedom of expression, girls’ right to education, among others. Some women and girls in Afghanistan may also face other forms of ill-treatment amounting to persecution (e.g. forced marriage, such as child marriage, honour based violence).
Meanwhile, the UNHCR guidance has not been updated since 2022. It comments on the grave situation in Afghanistan, but notes the difficulty in providing clear guidance on the country situation given the lack of international monitoring:
Given the obstacles to information gathering and reporting in Afghanistan, UNHCR calls on decision- makers on asylum applications by Afghan nationals to refrain from drawing adverse inferences from the absence of verified country of origin information to support and corroborate all aspects of the evidence provided by the applicant. In the current context in Afghanistan, it will frequently be the case that human rights violations and abuses remain undocumented and unreported. The lack of country of origin information describing particular incidents or patterns of violations and abuse should therefore not in itself be a reason to doubt the applicant’s credibility where the applicant’s statements are otherwise coherent and consistent.
In addition, UNHCR calls on decision-makers to give due weight to the uncertainty and unpredictability inherent in the modalities adopted by the de facto authorities for issuing decrees, coupled with the ongoing uncertainties regarding the applicability of Afghanistan’s previous legal framework. UNHCR considers that these circumstances render it particularly difficult to evaluate a future risk of persecution based on the currently available information on the human rights situation in Afghanistan, and in particular to conclude with the requisite level of confidence that an Afghan asylum applicant would not face a real risk of persecution upon return to the country of origin
However, UNCHR concludes definitively that women from Afghanistan are in need of international protection:
In light of the wide range of increasingly restrictive measures imposed by the de facto authorities on women and girls in Afghanistan in violation of their human rights, UNHCR considers Afghan women and girls are likely to be in need of international refugee protection under the 1951 Refugee Convention.
In December 2022 the UN Secretary-General observed that women’s rights in Afghanistan remain “severely curtailed”.19 In September 2022, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Afghanistan expressed “grave concern about the staggering regression in women and girls’ enjoyment of civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights since the Taliban took power.
In October 2024, the European Court of Justice held that the discriminatory measures adopted in respect of women by the Taliban regime in Afghanistan constitute acts of persecution.
The Home Office’s position
Unsurprisingly, the Home Office’s country policy information note on fear of the Taliban is confused and contradictory about the legal status of Afghan women:
The country note assesses that, “Former employees of, and/or those linked to international forces and organisations, including interpreters” are among those “likely to be at risk from the Taliban” [3.1.1]
It also notes that:
Those who are likely to be at risk from the Taliban also include, but may not be restricted to, people who do not conform to, or are perceived not to conform to, cultural and religious expectations/mores, such as:
a. Women […]
b. Human rights defenders critical of the Taliban […]
c. Judges and prosecutors who were involved in prosecuting and sentencing Taliban members during the insurgency …” [3.1.3]
On the treatment of Afghan women, the country note provides:
In a June 2023 report, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Afghanistan and the Working Group on discrimination against women and girls described the ‘widespread and systematic discrimination to which women and girls in Afghanistan are subjected’ … [14.1.2]
and:
d. The report of the UN Special Rapporteur also opined that ‘The pattern of large-scale systematic violations of women’s and girls’ fundamental rights in Afghanistan, abetted by the Taliban’s discriminatory and misogynistic policies and harsh enforcement methods, constitutes gender persecution and an institutionalized framework of gender apartheid.’ [14.1.3]
Finally, it states that “Where the person has a well-founded fear of persecution from the Taliban (the de facto state) they will not, in general, be able to obtain protection” [4.1.1.]
The country note relies on AS (Safety of Kabul) Afghanistan CG [2020] UKUT 00130 (IAC) and AK (Article 15(c)) Afghanistan CG [2012] UKUT 00163 (IAC) – despite the fact those country guidance cases predate the Taliban takeover – and claims that there are not very strong grounds supported by cogent evidence to depart from the findings of AK and AS.
Notwithstanding this, the position within these country guidance cases is as follows:
[AK] The purport of the current Home Office OGN on Afghanistan is that whilst women with a male support network may be able to relocate internally, “…it would be unreasonable to expect lone women and female heads of household to relocate internally” [B.(v) of the headnote]
[AS] The country guidance in AK (Article 15(c)) Afghanistan CG [2012] UKUT 163 (IAC) in relation to the (un)reasonableness of internal relocation to Kabul (and other potential places of internal relocation) for certain categories of women remains unaffected by this decision [vii of the headnote]
In effect, the Home Office have indicated that their position from 2010 remains the position in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan in 2025.
It was this reasoning that informed the inexplicable decision to refuse ‘Mina’s’ asylum claim.
The contradiction is highlighted at [3.7] of the country note which states:
3.7 Risk to women
3.7.1 Since August 2021, the Taliban have gradually restricted women’s social and political rights and limited the areas of public life they can engage within.
Women and girls are subject to widespread and systematic discrimination, which in general amounts to persecution. For example, the enforcement of the mahram (male chaperone) rule has restricted freedom of movement, whereas a series of edicts (and the way they are enforced) has prevented women from accessing education and employment, amongst other things. A dress code is also required, and although the extent to which this is enforced appears to be mixed, there are reports of women being harassed, assaulted, detained and ill-treated in custody due allegations of violating the dress code. The release of women and girls from detention is dependent on assurances from men in the family or community.
It seems as if Home Office decision makers are misguided when applying their own guidance.
Conclusion
This confusion has evidently led to the refusal of at least some women asylum seekers. It is also cruel and unfair to force Afghan women into a lengthy delay via the overloaded asylum appeal system when they will almost certainly be successful on appeal.
The Home Office should confirm that all women and girls from Afghanistan are in need of international protection, particularly as it may be some years before the tribunal may give country guidance on Afghanistan. This is the clear conclusion given by UNCHR, the EU Agency for Asylum and the European Court of Justice, and the only logical approach given the increasingly repressive measures that the Taliban are taking towards women.
It seems uncontroversial – and even popular – for the Home Office to offer protection to the few Afghan women and girls who have been able to flee the Taliban and make it to the UK. It is not clear why this is a battle that needs to be fought.
Interested in refugee law? You might like Colin's book, imaginatively called "Refugee Law" and published by Bristol University Press.
Communicating important legal concepts in an approachable way, this is an essential guide for students, lawyers and non-specialists alike.
SHARE
