UI2023001059

             In answer to questions from the panel the appellant said he lent his mobile phone to people who we lived with, it was not just the children in the household who borrowed his phone. People might want it to make calls. Asked to clarify how his parents had forced him to marry when he was then aged 27 he said that they told him he needed to get married. He was now a member of an outdoor club and was asked what outdoor activities he had been on. He replied that he had gone to the shopping centre at Bicester Village.

         In re-examination he said he was able to afford the rent on his accommodation because he worked (illegally) for three days a week in a shop.

         The respondent conceded that if the appellant was bisexual and chose to live openly in Pakistan as such he would be liable to persecution but on his case even in the United Kingdom he was living discreetly. The appellant had sent an email to his wife in a belated attempt to contact her but this too had not produced evidence. It was not credible that he would have deleted telephone numbers if he was bisexual and those numbers were going to be of use to him. The appeal should be dismissed.

         If the appellant's activities in the United Kingdom have been as extensive as he claims it is reasonable to have expected him to produce something more concrete than the rather vague assertions contained in the witness statement and in his interview. The appellant was put on notice by the dismissal of his appeal at first instance that the tribunal had taken an adverse view of the lack of supporting evidence. As will be seen from paragraphs 19 and 20 of the decision setting aside the decision of the First-tier Tribunal:

"The judge was entitled to take account of the absence of evidence of the appellant's activities in the UK. The appellant stated he had had various encounters with men in the UK. It was reasonable and lawful, in the circumstances, to observe that these "hook ups" were not supported by any evidence.