“…7. The following paragraphs are a summary of your statements and evidence in support of your application for asylum. This has been compiled using your asylum screening interview dated6/8/2013 (SCR), your substantive asylum interview dated 26/9/13 (AIR), your statement of evidence form dated 18/9/13 (SEF), an age assessment from the London Borough of Barnet dated29/8/2013 (AA) and a statement of amendments dated 17/8/13 (SA). You claim that: a) You are [MK], an Afghan national born1/1/2000 . You did not attend any formal schooling but have attended your local Madrassa (AIR 8). You are not sure how long you attended the Madrassa as you were too young when you started, however you stated you would go everyday except Fridays and continued attending following an attack on your family about three years ago (approximately September 2010) (AIR 28 & 62). You have never worked (AIR 30). b) Your immediate family consists of your mother, and your two younger brothers, who to your knowledge still live in Charde, Afghanistan (AIR 9 & SEF). You also have other family living in Afghanistan, such as your maternal uncle’s sons and maternal aunt’s sons, who live in Kabul and other relatives that live in different parts of Afghanistan (AIR 17-19). You spoke to your mother on arriving in the UK but have since lost her number. You have not attempted to contact her by post (AIR 20-5). Your father was a policeman and your mother was a housewife (SEF & AIR 92). c) In 2010 two members of the Taliban came to your family home at night and kidnapped your father, you have not seen him since (SEF C1.1 & AIR 48). They had guns and opened fire on your mother (SEF C1.2 & AIR 46). Your mother was attacked and her mouth and cheek was cut with a knife. d) During the attack you ran after them screaming and you were stabbed in the left arm and right thigh before becoming unconscious (SEF C1.1). You have scars in your shoulder as a result of the attack (AIR 94.) Alternatively, you were stabbed in the neck, shoulder and thigh (SCR 3.1). e) Following the attack, you did not visit a doctor or hospital. You used a cream which your neighbour gave you (AIR 51-4). You do not know whether your mother went to the police following the attack and you do not recall seeing any policeman visit your home (AIR 79). After you recovered from your injuries, you continued to attend Madrassa (AIR 61). f) You believe that you were not taken by the Taliban because you were too young (SEF C1.3). You have received no further contact from the Taliban following this attack (AIR 61). g) About two years later (approximately August 2012) your mother told you that now you are older it was too dangerous for you to stay and consequently you had to leave. You changed into traditional Afghan clothing and got in a taxi arranged by your mother (SEF C6). You then travelled through unknown countries on foot and in a lorry (SEF A.30 and AIR 68). h) You fear that if returned the Taliban will kill you because you tried to save your father and because you would not want to go with them (SEF C1.21). You also fear for your younger brother Jahan (SEF C1.5) …”
“All I can say is that the older you get the more likely the Taliban will want to recruit you. My mother was afraid that the Taliban would try to recruit me and that is why she sent me away.”
“1. Children are not disproportionately affected by the problems and conflict currently being experienced in Afghanistan. Roadside blasts, air-strikes, crossfire, suicide attacks and other war-related incidents do not impact more upon children than upon adult civilians.” 2. While forcible recruitment by the Taliban cannot be discounted as a risk, particularly in areas of high militant activity or militant control, evidence is required to show that it is a real risk for the particular child concerned and not a mere possibility.”
“30. Ms Braganza suggested that this appellant was of particular concern because of his father’s previous role as a policeman and abduction in 2010 and no doubt therefore could be distinguished from the situation outlined in HK and Others. However the United Nations High Commission for Refugees Report “Forced recruitment by the Taliban in Afghanistan: UNHCR’s perspective”,10th July 2012 (page 130-1 of the appellant’s bundle) makes reference to two European Asylum Support Office Reports whose conclusion was that forced recruitment by the Taliban was the exception rather than the rule. Given that the evidence indicates that the Taliban had not sought to recruit the appellant to their ranks in the two years between 2010 and 2012 I am not satisfied that it is established that there is a reasonable likelihood that if returned he would be at risk that they would do so in the future.”
“37. On the basis that I am satisfied that the appellant is able to contact his mother his position was that until he left Afghanistan he had lived with his mother all his life and he has other relatives living in Kabul. Whilst he has only received a basic education through the Madrassa his mother demonstrated that she was able to raise sufficient monies to send him to the UK and thus clearly has access to funds which would assist in any relocation of the family to Kabul which could in any event be further assisted by the family members already living there. I therefore conclude that it would not be unduly harsh to expect the appellant, if necessary, to relocate to Kabul and consider it reasonable to expect him to do so with or without his mother, as I am satisfied he has other family members residing in Kabul.”
“a) The Appellant’s account was that as he was growing older he was more likely to be at risk of retaliation than he would have been as a very young child of ten. That the Appellant had not encountered any adverse consequences between 2010 and 2012 would not of itself be indicative of the extent to which the risk was made out for the future. The Upper Tribunal relied on the finding that during the relevant period of two years no adverse attention had apparently come either to the applicant or to any other family members. In assessing the likelihood of either retaliatory measures or forcible recruitment by the Taliban coming to pass, it was legitimate to enquire whether anything untoward had occurred in the time since the father had been kidnapped, and the First-Tier Tribunal had concluded that it had not and that that was of relevance to both of the areas of concern. In assessing the likelihood of either retaliatory measures or forcible recruitment by the Taliban coming to pass, the First Tier Tribunal and the Upper Tribunal erred having regard to the age of the applicant and the possible consequences in the event of his forcible repatriation. b) There was no finding as to the risk on return for the Appellant because of his father’s known position as a police officer and his father’s abduction. c) There was no finding or conclusion as to the risk and/or safety faced by the Appellant in Kabul on the basis of his father’s known position as a police officer and his abduction. Internal flight cannot be separated from the reasons for the risk on return to the home area.”