Internal Relocation to Kabul - Expert Considerations

Internal relocation to Kabul is frequently argued by respondents in Afghanistan asylum appeals. Expert evidence should clarify what Kabul-specific conditions mean for the instructed profile - not replace the tribunal's assessment of reasonableness. This article explains what relocation analysis covers, how it links to country guidance, profile-specific considerations solicitors should flag at instruction, and how expert evidence fits with legal argument in tribunals worldwide.

What internal relocation means in expert evidence

Legal tests for internal relocation vary by jurisdiction. The country expert does not apply those tests. The expert describes conditions a returnee may encounter in Kabul (or via Kabul when travelling onward) so the tribunal can assess feasibility, safety and reasonableness under domestic law.

Relocation arguments often assume a returnee can establish life in the capital without facing undue hardship or renewed persecution. Country evidence addresses whether sourced materials support or undermine that factual premise for the instructed profile - not whether the tribunal must allow the appeal.

What experts address in Kabul analysis

Reports may cover security incidents in Kabul, economic conditions, access to healthcare, housing and support networks, and visibility of the claimant's profile in the capital. Regional origin remains relevant: return may be via Kabul before onward travel to provinces of origin.

Security analysis should use Kabul-specific incident reporting where available, distinguishing targeted violence from general urban criminality. Economy covers employment, remittance dependence, banking access and cost of living documented in CPIN and humanitarian updates. Healthcare addresses facility availability - relevant where trauma or disability is alleged; see mental health and healthcare. Housing may involve hosting by relatives, rental markets, and IDP settlement conditions. Networks matter: a returnee with no contacts faces different sourced constraints from one with established family support.

Visibility ties profile to conditions: a female professional previously employed by an international NGO may be more visible than a child returnee within a controlled household. Former government employees may face documentation checks - see former government and ARAP.

Linking to country guidance

Practitioners should align instructions with current country guidance chapters on internal relocation and security, noting publication dates relative to the hearing. The expert should explain any divergence between sources rather than select only supportive passages.

Different forums use their own country information products. The same analytical discipline applies: cite chapter and date, paraphrase with pinpoints, and include passages that do not assist the applicant where fairly read. Long block quotations are unnecessary; see OSCOLA sources for citation practice.

Where CPIN describes Kabul as relatively more secure than rural provinces, the expert should contextualise what "relative" means for the claimant's gender, ethnicity and livelihood - not treat national capital statistics as dispositive of individual risk.

Profile-specific analysis

A young single woman, a former interpreter, or a visible Hazara may face different constraints in Kabul. Instructions must set out the claimant's circumstances; the expert maps conditions to those facts within agreed scope.

Women and girls - mahram enforcement, education and employment restrictions, and gender-based violence reporting barriers are central - see women and girls' rights. Hazara and other minorities - community visibility in specific districts may matter - see Hazara and ethnic minorities. Security-sensitive profiles - linked to Taliban persecution or security and ISKP. Provide chronology if the claimant previously lived in Kabul and left under threat.

Kabul as transit versus destination

Some respondents argue claimants need only pass through Kabul to reach a home province. Expert analysis should address both legs where instructed: conditions in Kabul during settlement or transit, and conditions in the province of origin if return is staged. Checkpoint practices and documentation scrutiny affect both stages in sourced reporting.

If the client proposes living in Kabul permanently rather than returning to origin, say so. Relocation analysis differs when the capital is the intended long-term residence.

Economic practicability

Tribunals often weigh whether a returnee can survive economically without undue hardship. Experts describe documented employment markets, aid dependence, and barriers women or minorities face - without inventing salary figures unsupported by sources. Where economic data is sparse, the report should acknowledge limits.

Remittances from abroad may assist some households; whether that makes relocation "reasonable" is a legal judgment. The expert supplies factual context only.

Interaction with credibility and COI

COI interviews sometimes explore why the claimant did not relocate internally before leaving Afghanistan. The expert does not judge credibility answers but may explain whether internal movement was realistically open for the described profile at the relevant time, using contemporary sources.

Instructing relocation-focused evidence

See our analysis on internal relocation and return to Kabul and country conditions. To instruct, use the contact form with hearing date, jurisdiction, profile summary, and whether relocation is a live issue in the appeal.

Provide respondent skeleton arguments on relocation, refusal letter extracts, and any maps or district identifiers. Agree scope via expert witness services before research begins.

Bundle and hearing use

Relocation evidence should be clearly signposted in the bundle index. Counsel links expert findings to the legal test in submissions without asking the expert to state that relocation "fails" as a matter of law.

Cross-check case types for intersecting topics. Official source starting points are on resources. Sample structure available via sample report on request.

Limitations

Kabul conditions change; neighbourhood-level detail may be thinner than national CPIN summaries. Experts should not fabricate micro-local knowledge unsupported by sources. Honest limitation strengthens credibility.

This article is general guidance for practitioners worldwide and does not constitute legal advice.

Back to the blog