Judge suggests Home Office used AI-hallucinated evidence
A senior judge has suggested the UK Home Office may have used AI-hallucinated information to refuse an asylum claim, after a cited Morocco country policy note could not be found. The upper tribunal called reliance on the missing document analogous to relying on bogus evidence, and the woman’s case continues.
Key Takeaways
- An upper tribunal judge said a Home Office refusal letter “bears hallmarks consistent with the use of artificial intelligence.”
- The cited “country information note Morocco July 2021” CPIN could not be located, and officials could not confirm it exists.
- The judge called relying on a nonexistent document “analogous to relying on bogus evidence” and a procedural irregularity.
- Internal guidance later produced does not conclude Morocco is safe for women in the appellant’s position; the case continues.
The ruling lands as governments worldwide face sharper scrutiny over automated tools in high-stakes decisions. For readers tracking AI risk and institutional accountability, related coverage sits in our Fintech & Crypto Alerts hub.
What did the judge say about the missing document?
According to The Guardian, the case concerns a Moroccan woman and her child who fled forced underage marriage and extreme violence, including rape. She sought asylum, fearing she would be killed by her husband, described as a powerful, previously convicted criminal.
The Home Office refused the claim, citing a country policy information note (CPIN) said to show Morocco would be safe. A first-tier tribunal judge relied on that document when dismissing her appeal. On further appeal, an upper tribunal judge decided on 14 July that “it appears that no such CPIN has ever existed.”
The judge noted the note was not in the public domain and that the Home Office’s country policy and information team could not confirm its existence. After reviewing the refusal letter, he said it “bears hallmarks consistent with the use of artificial intelligence,” adding that references to “country information note Morocco July 2021” may be an AI “hallucination”—an “extremely serious failing” if proven.
Why does an AI hallucination allegation matter in asylum decisions?
Asylum refusals turn on country evidence that judges often treat as authoritative. Citing a document that never existed, the upper tribunal said, is “analogous to relying on bogus evidence.” The judge framed the problem as a “procedural irregularity,” underscoring how fabricated or unverifiable citations can distort life-or-death outcomes.
Separately, reporting elsewhere has shown courts challenging government filings that appear AI-generated and cite nonexistent authorities—another reminder that automated text can invent sources with confidence. In this UK case, the allegation remains tied to the refusal letter’s hallmarks and the missing CPIN, not a proven admission of AI use.
No CPIN on Morocco has been published since 2017, The Guardian reported. During the case, Home Office references shifted from unpublished internal country information note (CIN) guidance to the more authoritative CPIN label.
What did the Home Office produce instead, and what happens next?
Asked where the document was, the Home Office first pointed to an archive where it could not be found, then produced a different, unpublished internal CIN. That internal note was never disclosed in the legal proceedings and does not conclude Morocco is safe for forcible return of women in circumstances like the appellant’s.
The CIN states that in 2018 exemptions granted 40,000 child marriages—one-fifth of marriages that year—and that Moroccan law does not explicitly criminalise marital rape. Women who report rape may themselves face criminalisation for sex outside marriage if authorities disbelieve them.
Home Office sources said they could provide further information the judge requested. A spokesperson said claims are considered on individual merits and the latest evidence, while stressing wider efforts to control the asylum system. The woman’s case continues.