How African Country Experts Assess State Protection in Asylum Cases

State protection can become an important issue in an asylum claim where the alleged risk comes from a non-state actor. This may include a family member, community group, armed group, private individual or other non-state organisation.

The question is not necessarily limited to whether laws or government institutions exist. Depending on the circumstances, it may also be relevant to consider how those institutions operate in practice, whether protection can be accessed, and whether there are country-specific factors that may affect a person's ability to seek assistance.

An African country expert may assist with these questions by providing independent, country-specific evidence within their area of expertise. The expert's role is not to determine whether an asylum claim should succeed or to make a legal determination about state protection. Rather, the expert may provide evidence about relevant conditions, practices and circumstances in the country concerned.

Disclaimer:This article provides general information about the potential role of African country expert evidence in asylum cases. It is not legal advice and does not determine whether protection is available in any individual case. The relevance and weight of expert evidence will depend on the facts of the case, the applicable law and guidance, the expert's qualifications and the evidence available at the relevant time.

Last Reviewed: September 2026

What Is State Protection in an Asylum Case?

State protection generally concerns whether a person facing persecution or serious harm from a non-state actor can avail themselves of protection in their country of nationality or former habitual residence.

Under the UK asylum framework, protection may generally be regarded as provided where the relevant actors of protection take reasonable steps to prevent persecution or serious harm by operating an effective legal system for detecting, prosecuting and punishing relevant acts, and the person can access that protection.

The existence of legislation or formal institutions may therefore be only one part of the country evidence.

For example, a country may have laws addressing a particular form of violence or discrimination, while access to the relevant authorities may vary between regions or groups. There may also be differences between formal legal provisions and their implementation in practice.

These are matters that may require country-specific evidence, depending on the issues raised by the case.

What Can an African Country Expert Contribute?

The precise scope of an expert's evidence will depend on their qualifications, experience, the country concerned and the questions set out in the instructions.

Depending on the circumstances, an appropriately qualified country expert may be able to provide evidence concerning:

• The operation of relevant state institutions
• Access to police or other authorities
• Local or regional differences in the availability of protection
• The practical implementation of relevant laws
• Treatment of particular groups by state authorities
• Social or institutional barriers that may affect access to protection
• The role of local authorities or other relevant structures
• Country-specific reasons why individuals may or may not approach the authorities
• Relevant developments that may have affected the operation of state institutions

The expert should remain within the limits of their expertise and distinguish between established facts, information obtained from sources and their own professional opinion.

Looking Beyond Formal Laws and Institutions

One issue that may arise in country expert evidence is the distinction between formal protection and the practical operation of that protection.

A country may have legislation that prohibits particular conduct. It may also have police, courts or other institutions responsible for responding to complaints.

However, the existence of these structures does not necessarily provide a complete picture of how protection operates in every location or for every group.

An expert may therefore consider relevant country evidence about the implementation of laws and the operation of institutions.

Access to Authorities

Access can be an important country-specific consideration.

Depending on the country and circumstances, relevant factors may include geographical location, availability of functioning institutions, administrative barriers, language, financial limitations or other practical difficulties.

These factors should not be assumed to apply uniformly across an entire country. An expert may instead consider whether there is reliable evidence concerning the particular region or community relevant to the case.

Police and Other Institutions

Where the police or another state institution is relevant, an expert may examine its role and practical operation.

This could include evidence concerning how complaints are received, how particular forms of harm are treated, or whether there are documented differences in practice between locations or groups.

The purpose of this analysis is not necessarily to determine whether the legal threshold for protection has been met. It may instead provide the decision-maker with relevant country context.

Implementation of Laws

An expert may also consider whether relevant legislation appears to be implemented consistently in practice.

For example, there may be a difference between the wording of a law and how it is applied by officials. There may also be documented differences between national policy and local practice.

Where such differences are relevant, they should be supported by appropriate country evidence.

Why Regional Context Can Matter

Conditions may differ significantly between African countries and, in some cases, between regions within a country.

The availability and operation of state institutions may therefore vary depending on the location concerned.

For this reason, an expert assessing country conditions may need to consider the particular area relevant to the case rather than relying solely on general national information.

Relevant considerations may include:

• Whether government institutions operate effectively in the relevant area
• Whether another authority exercises significant influence or control
• Whether police and judicial institutions are accessible locally
• Whether particular communities experience different treatment
• Whether security conditions differ between regions
• Whether local administrative or customary structures have a relevant role in the particular country and circumstances

The importance of any particular factor will depend on the evidence and the circumstances of the individual case.

For cases involving detailed geographic issues, country-specific expertise may therefore be relevant alongside broader country of origin information.

Considering the Circumstances of the Individual

Country expert evidence should be connected to the issues that the expert has been asked to address.

Depending on the case, the expert may need to consider information about the individual's location, community, family circumstances or other relevant characteristics when explaining how country conditions may apply.

Potentially relevant factors could include:

• Place of origin or previous residence
• Ethnic or community background
• Gender
• Religion
• Political activity
• Family or social connections
• Previous interaction with state authorities
• The identity or influence of the alleged non-state actor

Not every factor will be relevant in every case.

The purpose of considering these matters is not for the expert to determine the credibility of the claimant or decide the legal outcome. Instead, the expert may provide context for explaining whether particular country conditions are relevant to the questions on which they have been instructed.

Where a Person Has Not Sought Protection

A further issue may arise where a claimant has not previously approached the authorities.

There may be different reasons why a person does not report alleged harm. Depending on the country and circumstances, these might include concerns about treatment by officials, fear of retaliation, lack of access to relevant institutions, social pressures or previous experiences of authorities.

An expert may be able to provide country-specific evidence concerning whether such factors are documented or recognised in the relevant context.

The fact that a person has not previously approached the authorities should not, by itself, be treated as establishing or disproving the availability of protection. The reasons for not seeking protection and the relevant country conditions may need to be considered in the circumstances of the individual case.

The expert should not assume that a claimant's explanation is correct or determine the credibility of that explanation. The appropriate role may instead be to explain whether the country evidence provides relevant context for the circumstances described.

Sources That May Inform State Protection Evidence

Country expert evidence should be based on sources that are appropriate to the issues being considered.

Depending on the subject matter, an expert may consider:

• Relevant legislation and official publications
• Government or institutional material
• Country of origin information
• Reports from international organisations
• Academic research
• Reputable human rights reporting
• Local or regional reporting
• Relevant statistical material
• The expert's own specialist knowledge and experience

The appropriate sources will depend on the question being addressed.

Where possible, important factual assertions should have a clear evidential basis. The report should also distinguish between information obtained from sources and the expert's own assessment.

A useful country expert report does not necessarily require a large volume of material. The relevance, reliability and applicability of the evidence may be more important than the quantity of sources cited.

The Importance of Local and Country-Specific Knowledge

The term "Africa" covers countries with different legal systems, institutions, political structures, languages, social conditions and regional dynamics.

Evidence about one African country should not automatically be treated as evidence about another.

There can also be substantial differences within an individual country. Conditions in a capital city, for example, may not necessarily reflect conditions in a rural area or another region.

An expert with appropriate knowledge of the relevant country may therefore be able to provide context concerning local institutions, regional conditions, social structures and other matters that may be difficult to assess from general information alone.

The relevance of that expertise will depend on the particular instructions and the expert's qualifications.

Maintaining Independence and Objectivity

Expert evidence should remain independent and objective.

An expert's role is to assist the court or tribunal on matters within their expertise. They should not act as an advocate for the party instructing them.

This is particularly important where evidence concerning state protection involves several sources or where the available material points in different directions.

A report should therefore avoid presenting disputed matters as established facts without qualification. Where the evidence is incomplete or conflicting, the limitations should be identified.

An expert should also avoid reaching conclusions that require legal judgment where the issue falls outside their professional expertise.

For further information about the role and instruction of an Africa expert witness, see How to Instruct an Africa Expert Witness.

How State Protection Evidence Relates to Other Evidence

Country expert evidence is only one component of the evidence that may be considered in an asylum case.

Other evidence may include the claimant's account, documentary material, medical evidence, country of origin information and other relevant expert evidence.

An African country expert does not determine whether a claimant's account is credible or whether the legal requirements for international protection have been established.

Instead, the expert may provide country-specific evidence that assists the decision-maker in understanding relevant conditions and assessing the issues raised by the case.

For further context on country-specific evidence, see Country Conditions & Human Rights.

When Might Country-Specific Evidence Be Relevant?

The need for expert evidence will depend on the circumstances of each case.

It may be relevant where a case raises a detailed question about the practical operation of state institutions, access to protection, regional differences or the position of a particular group, particularly where the available general material does not adequately address that issue.

This does not mean that every asylum claim involving an African country requires an expert report.

The more useful question may be whether there is a specific country-related issue on which specialist evidence could assist the decision-maker.

Where an expert is instructed for an asylum appeal, the evidence may also need to be considered alongside any applicable country guidance and the other evidence relied upon in the case. Further information about expert evidence in First-tier Tribunal asylum appeals is available in the First-tier Tribunal asylum appeal guide.

Conclusion

State protection can involve questions about laws, institutions, access to authorities and the practical conditions in the country concerned.

An African country expert may assist by explaining relevant country-specific circumstances, including the operation of state institutions, regional differences and factors that may affect access to protection.

The expert's role is to provide independent evidence within their expertise. They do not decide whether an individual is entitled to asylum or determine the legal sufficiency of state protection.

The value of country expert evidence will depend on the particular question being considered, the quality and relevance of the available evidence, the expert's specialist knowledge and the circumstances of the individual case.