A senior judge has accused the Home Office of relying on “AI hallucinated” information to refuse an asylum claim. The case involves a Moroccan woman and her child who fled their country after experiencing forced underage marriage and extreme violence, including rape. The woman claimed asylum fearing she would be killed by her husband, a powerful convicted criminal.
Home Office Cites Nonexistent Document
The Home Office refused her case, citing a country policy information note (CPIN) that supposedly confirmed Morocco would be safe for her. However, the document could not be found. Its existence was relied upon by a first-tier tribunal judge who rejected her appeal. The woman then appealed to the upper tribunal, where Judge Perkins raised concerns. In a decision on 14 July, the judge stated: “It appears that no such CPIN has ever existed.” He added that the Home Office’s country policy team could not confirm its existence.
AI Hallucination Alleged
Judge Perkins noted that the Home Office’s refusal letter “bears hallmarks consistent with the use of artificial intelligence,” suggesting the reference to the CPIN may result from an AI “hallucination.” He called this an “extremely serious failing” and said relying on a nonexistent document is “analogous to relying on bogus evidence.” He determined a procedural irregularity occurred.
Home Office Produces Different Document
The Guardian asked the Home Office for the document. Initially, they provided a link to an archive where it could not be found. Later, they produced an unpublished internal guidance note (CIN). No CPIN on Morocco has been published since 2017. The internal document does not conclude Morocco is safe for women like the appellant. It notes 40,000 child marriages in 2018, that Moroccan law does not criminalize marital rape, and that women reporting rape may face prosecution for sex outside marriage if disbelieved.
Official Response
A Home Office spokesperson said: “The home secretary is restoring order and control to our 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 woman’s case continues.
