Home Office accused of using hallucinated evidence in asylum refusal

Judge questions existence of key document

A senior judge has suggested the Home Office may have relied on "AI hallucinated" information when refusing an asylum application, after finding that a key document cited in the case appears never to have existed.

In a ruling by the Upper Tribunal, the judge – who has not been named – raised concerns over references to a country policy and information note (CPIN) that had been used to support the decision to reject a woman's claim for asylum.

Despite searches by the court and the Home Office's own country policy team, no such document could be located.

The judge said the refusal letter displayed "hallmarks consistent with the use of artificial intelligence" and suggested that references to the missing CPIN could have resulted from an AI-generated "hallucination," although the allegation has not been proven.

He warned that, if this proved to be the case, it would represent an "extremely serious failing" by the Home Office.

Tribunal compares missing evidence to 'bogus' material

The case, which continues before the Upper Tribunal, concerns a woman who fled Morocco with her child after she said she was forced into a child marriage and raped.

She sought asylum in the UK, saying she feared her husband, who has previous criminal convictions, would kill her if she were returned.

Her claim was initially rejected by the Home Office, with officials citing the purported CPIN as evidence that Morocco was a safe country for her return.

That decision was later upheld by the First-tier Tribunal, which relied on the same document.

However, when the case reached the Upper Tribunal, the judge found no evidence that the cited CPIN had ever been published.

He described reliance on the missing document as "analogous to relying on bogus evidence" and ruled that it amounted to a procedural irregularity requiring the case to be reconsidered.

AI scrutiny grows over asylum decision-making

The case adds to wider concerns over the use of AI in immigration and asylum processes.

Last year, official documents released under Freedom of Information laws showed that a Home Office trial of an AI-powered asylum interview summarisation tool, which used a GPT-4-based model, found nearly one in ten AI-generated summaries were so inaccurate or incomplete they had to be discarded.

The Home Office has also faced criticism over its past use of automated technologies.

In 2020, it abandoned a visa-processing algorithm following allegations that it discriminated against applicants from certain countries.

More recently, ministers announced plans to explore AI-assisted age assessments for asylum seekers claiming to be children, despite warnings from an independent watchdog that errors would be unavoidable.

Responding to the latest case, the Home Office told The Guardian it had supplied the additional information sought by the judge during the proceedings.

A Home Office spokesperson said the government was working to restore control over the asylum system "by removing incentives drawing illegal migrants to the UK and ramping up removals of those with no right to be on British soil."

"We keep our asylum system under constant review. Claims are always considered on their individual merits and based on the latest evidence to ensure only those in genuine need are granted UK protection," the spokesperson added.