Asylum seeker declared a ‘child’ by UK judges despite being at least 23 with ‘receding hairline’ and ‘thick facial hair’

The case of a Sudanese asylum seeker, who claims to be a child but is believed by the Home Office to be at least 23 years old, has sparked controversy after immigration judges ruled in his favor. Despite assessments by the Home Office and the London Borough of Hounslow that he appeared much older—citing his receding hairline, thick facial hair, broad chest, forehead wrinkles, and crow’s feet—the judges declared his date of birth to be April 3, 2007, meaning he would be treated as a child during his asylum process.

The migrant, who arrived in the UK by small boat on September 6, 2023, after traveling through Libya, Tunisia, Italy, and France, was initially placed in adult asylum accommodation. However, his legal team challenged this decision, leading to a judicial review. In December 2023, a judge ordered that he be moved to children’s accommodation while his case was being decided.

The final ruling, delivered by Judges Hugo Norton-Taylor and Sarah Pinder, concluded that the asylum seeker had provided a “true account” of his age and date of birth. They dismissed concerns about his physical appearance, noting that a photograph from April 2024 showed only “very light facial hair” on his upper lip. The judges also rejected the argument that his wisdom teeth indicated he was older, stating that such evidence was inconclusive.

The ruling has drawn criticism, particularly from Home Office officials and some members of the public, who argue that the decision undermines efforts to ensure accurate age assessments in the asylum process. The case has also raised broader questions about the challenges of verifying the ages of asylum seekers and the potential implications for local authorities and public services.

The London Borough of Hounslow has been ordered to treat the migrant as a child and provide support under the Children Act 1989, as well as pay over £30,000 towards his legal costs. The judges emphasized that the asylum seeker had been consistent in his account of his age, which he claimed to have learned from his mother and through his studies at a Khalwa (a Quranic school).

This case highlights the complexities and controversies surrounding age disputes in the UK’s asylum system, as well as the tensions between legal rulings, government assessments, and public perception.