Country Expert Database: New Findings from 120+ Countries

Last updated: 5 October 2026

Photo: United Nations - eGuide Travel

Our country expert database now covers more than 50 countries with new findings emerging across multiple regions. Drawing on aggregated case work, UN documentation, NGO reporting, and academic literature, the database reflects the diversity of contemporary refugee-producing situations. Furthermore, weekly updates capture deteriorating and improving conditions alike — a critical input for accurate country expert reporting. As a result, the database functions as both an internal practice tool and a source of regular country-level analysis. This article highlights new findings from key country files and outlines what they mean for asylum practice in 2026.[1]

See also: expert witness database overview.

Countries with Deteriorating Conditions

Eight countries in the database have seen significant deterioration over the past 12-18 months. These include Sudan (continuing war and famine declaration); Afghanistan (worsening under Taliban rule); Russia (intensifying repression and 207.3 enforcement); Iran (post-2022 crackdown continues); Myanmar (post-coup conditions); Haiti (state collapse and gang violence); Pakistan (TLP-driven blasphemy mob violence); Burkina Faso/Mali/Niger (Sahel instability). Furthermore, in several of these countries, the deterioration outpaces the publication of new country guidance and CPINs — creating gaps that expert reports must fill. As a result, expert reports for these countries should explicitly note the deteriorating trajectory.[2]

Countries with Modest Improvement

A small number of countries show modest improvement — though none to the level that fundamentally changes asylum assessments. Ethiopia: post-November 2022 Pretoria Agreement has reduced active conflict in Tigray, though residual concerns continue particularly around Amhara and Oromo conflicts and ongoing displacement. Sri Lanka: 2024 political change introduced some reformist rhetoric, though structural issues (PTA, military presence in Tamil areas, lack of accountability) persist. Eritrea: no structural change but reduced reports of military operations across borders since 2022 Tigray ceasefire. Furthermore, even where conditions are modestly better, applicants from these countries with specific risk profiles continue to have strong claims. As a result, "improvement" should not be overstated in expert reports.[3]

Emerging Concern: Transnational Repression

A cross-cutting trend across the database is the rise of transnational repression — states reaching across borders to target citizens in exile. The leading practitioners are: China (Uyghur and Hong Kong diaspora); Russia (journalists and dissidents); Iran (women's rights, religious minorities); Belarus (post-2020 protesters); Saudi Arabia and UAE (dissidents abroad); Egypt (activists). Furthermore, methods include: in absentia prosecutions; family pressure in home country; surveillance through diaspora networks; cyber-attacks (Pegasus and similar); physical attacks abroad. As a result, sur place activity is increasingly important in asylum claims — both as a basis for risk and as evidence of state hostility. Therefore, country expert reports must address transnational repression methodically.[4]

"Transnational repression has emerged as a defining feature of contemporary refugee production. The state's reach extends beyond its borders — and so must the country expert's analysis."Country Expert Practice Working Note, 2026

Religious Persecution: Specific Patterns

Religious persecution patterns documented in the database include: Christian converts (Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, North Korea); Ahmadi Muslims (Pakistan, Indonesia in some areas); Muslims (Myanmar Rohingya, India in some contexts, China Uyghur); Yazidis (Iraq, Syria); Bahá'í (Iran); Falun Gong (China); LGBT+ persons facing religious-derived sanctions. Furthermore, religious persecution often overlaps with ethnic and political persecution — for example, Uyghur (ethnic + Muslim), Rohingya (ethnic + Muslim), Pakistani Christian (religion + class). As a result, religious persecution claims often involve multi-grounded analysis. Therefore, country expert reports should engage with the specific religious-ethnic-political intersections rather than treating religion in isolation.[5]

Gender-Based Persecution

Gender-based persecution remains a major category, with country-specific patterns: Afghanistan (Taliban Vice & Virtue laws); Iran (Hijab Law, women's rights); Pakistan (honour-based violence; FGM in some communities); Iraq (honour-based violence in conflict-affected areas); Sudan (CRSV); various African states (FGM). Furthermore, LGBTQ+ persecution overlaps with gender-based persecution and is documented in many of the same countries. As a result, the UNHCR Gender Guidelines (GIP-01, 2002) remain core authority. Therefore, country expert reports addressing gender-based claims should engage with both country-specific patterns and the UNHCR framework.[6]

Database Methodology and Sources

The database is built from multiple source types. First, UN bodies: OHCHR Special Rapporteurs, Fact-Finding Missions, treaty body observations, UNHCR position papers. Second, NGO reports: HRW, Amnesty International, Article 19, CPJ, and country-specific organisations. Third, government sources: US State Department Country Reports, UK Home Office CPINs, Canadian IRB NDPs, EUAA COI reports. Fourth, academic and journalistic literature. Fifth, primary documents — leaked archives, parliamentary inquiries, court judgments. Furthermore, the database maintains source quality assessments — distinguishing primary from secondary sources and noting potential bias. As a result, source pluralism is built into the database's structure. Therefore, expert reports drawing on the database benefit from this source diversity.[7]

Update Process

The database is updated weekly. The update process involves: monitoring news and reports from key sources for the 120+ countries; identifying new developments with asylum relevance; updating country files with new findings; flagging significant developments for expert and practitioner attention. Furthermore, major developments (e.g., new UNHCR position papers, government policy changes) trigger immediate review of pending case files. As a result, expert reports drawing on the database are current to within a week of submission. Therefore, the discipline of weekly update maintenance is essential to the database's practical value.[8]

Conclusion: A Resource for the Long Term

A country expert database covering 120+ countries with regular updates serves multiple purposes: supporting current expert work, identifying emerging trends, providing context for new cases, and contributing to the broader knowledge base for refugee determination. Furthermore, by combining systematic source review with case-derived insights, the database delivers value to applicants, practitioners, and the refugee determination system. Therefore, ongoing investment in database development is a long-term commitment to high-quality expert evidence work.