Sudanese migrant with ‘receding hairline and deep voice’ is 15 | UK | News

‘Thin hairline and deep voice’ A Sudanese immigrant won an age lawsuit after an immigration judge ruled he was 15. The court heard authorities in Britain believed the asylum seeker was 24 when he arrived due to his “mature physical demeanor, distinct bone structure and jawline”.

The immigrant, who claimed to be 15 years old, “looked older” due to his “pronounced jawline”, “pronounced Adam’s apple” and “deep voice”. Age assessors said he was ‘much older’ than 15 and had the attitude and ‘maturity’ of someone in their 20s.

In the evaluation made by Westminster City Council upon his arrival in England, allegations that he was 15 years old were rejected, while it was stated that he was 24 years old.

However, the Sudanese immigrant appealed and won the age case filed in the asylum court.

Superior Court Judge Melissa Canavan said that although multiple experts had identified him as over 15, it was his cultural heritage that gave him his physical characteristics and the journey to the UK he had endured had made his demeanor more ‘mature’.

The Immigration and Asylum Appeals Court heard the Sudanese man arrived in the UK and slept rough with a friend until he got to the police station.

The immigrant, whose name was not disclosed and referred to as MM, stated that his date of birth was May 15, 2009 during the first age determination.

He said that he came from Sudan and that his mother and father still lived there.

He said that he was born in 2009 and was 15 years old, but he did not have any identification documents with him.

Westminster City Council rejected his claim, saying he was ‘much older’.

The court heard: “Westminster City Council held a Brief Inquiry (“first age assessment”) on 10 June 2024. The notes record that M told the assessors that her date of birth was 15 May 2009.

“The age assessment concluded that she was older than the alleged 15 years old and was likely 24 years old.

“This was because M “looked older” than her claimed age because of her “mature physical demeanor, defined bone structure and jawline.”

“He also had a ‘visibly receding hairline and a deep voice.’ No date of birth was apparently stated. This assessment indicates that he was 25 years old at the time of the trial.”

An additional age assessment was carried out by Hammersmith and Fulham Council when the migrant moved into adult accommodation.

At this stage, he was sent a photograph of his birth certificate and Sudanese Civil Registration Certificate (CRC) to show to the assessors.

He stated that his date of birth was April 25, 2009, which was consistent with his birth certificate but differed from what he had initially reported during his age assessment.

The second assessment concluded that the first assessment was correct and that the immigrant was 24 years old because he was “very confident” during the interview and “expressed no emotion when talking about having to leave his family.”

An expert on Sudanese culture said the day and month a person was born are not commonly recorded in Sudan, so the inconsistency in remembering this may be due to culture.

Judge Canavan said: “The fact that M misremembered the day and month of his birthday does not impair his credibility that much, given the fatigue and cultural context of the interview.”

Questions were raised about his birth certificate and whether it had been falsified.

The identification documents he showed were “low quality” photographs that he said his mother had sent him.

The judge accepted that this was valid.

During the court hearing, the immigrant was seen “scribbling” in his notebook and was asked to “concentrate” when asked questions.

Judge Canavan said this showed a young person was “immature” because he did not understand the significance of the situation.

Judge Canavan said he had provided documentary evidence that the migrant was a child and had been traumatized by traveling to the UK, which could have been a reason for his demeanor.

He said: “M’s birth certificate and CRC images are not the best evidence of his age because he was unable to produce the original documents.

“In the light of [expert] Given the evidence and what is known about the situation in the area where M comes from, it is plausible that it would be difficult to send the original documents by post to England.

“Electronic images would therefore have been the only realistic way of transferring information to the UK.

“The weight of the evidence does not support the conclusions contained in the first and second age assessments that M was likely to be 24 years of age.”

The judge added: “For the reasons set out above, I now conclude that the weight of the evidence shows that it is more likely than not that M was 16, the stated age at the date of the case. [tribunal] hearing.”

Westminster City Council will have to pay the immigrant’s legal costs.

Details of his asylum status are unknown.