How We Assess Return Risk: Expert Witness Methodology

Last updated: 5 October 2026

Photo: Prison Jail Cell - Jobs For Felons Hub

How do expert witnesses assess whether someone faces danger if returned to their home country? This is the core question behind every asylum expert report. Our return risk methodology follows a clear, step-by-step process. Each step builds on the last. Together, they create a complete picture of the risk an individual faces. This article explains exactly how we do it.[1]

A strong return risk methodology is what separates a useful expert report from a weak one. Judges want to see a clear process. They want to understand how the expert reached their conclusions. Therefore, transparency in methodology is essential. Our approach is based on international standards and has been tested across hundreds of cases. If you need an expert report for your case, you can find an expert witness through our directory.

Step 1: Individual Risk Profile

The first step is to understand the person. Who are they? What are their characteristics? What did they do that might put them at risk? We start by reviewing the applicant's witness statement and all supporting documents. We look at key factors such as ethnicity, religion, political opinion, gender, sexual orientation, and social group. These are the protected characteristics under the 1951 Refugee Convention.[2]

We also look at what the person did. Did they take part in political activities? Did they work with a foreign organisation? Did they refuse to follow a particular law? Each of these actions creates a specific risk profile. Additionally, we consider the person's visibility. A well-known activist faces different risks than someone who attended one protest. The individual risk profile is the foundation of the entire assessment. Without it, the report would be a general country overview, which is not what judges need.

Step 2: Country Conditions Analysis

Next, we analyse the current conditions in the person's home country. This means looking at the political situation, the security environment, and the human rights record. We use a wide range of sources. These include reports from UNHCR, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and Freedom House.[3]

We also review UK Home Office Country Policy and Information Notes (CPINs), US State Department country reports, and academic research. Furthermore, we check recent news reports for any changes that may not yet appear in official publications. Country conditions can change quickly. A coup, a new law, or a crackdown on protests can dramatically alter the risk environment. Therefore, we always use the most recent information available. Our country reports section provides detailed, up-to-date analysis for many countries.

Step 3: Pattern Matching

This step asks a critical question: does this person's profile match documented patterns of persecution? We look at whether people with similar characteristics have been targeted in the past. For example, if the applicant is a journalist who criticised the government, we look for evidence that other journalists have been arrested, detained, or harmed for similar work.[4]

Pattern matching strengthens the report because it moves beyond one person's story. It shows that the risk is real and documented. We use case databases, human rights monitoring reports, and media coverage to identify patterns. Moreover, we look at whether the pattern is ongoing or has stopped. A pattern that existed five years ago but has since ended carries less weight. Consequently, we focus on recent and current patterns of persecution or harm.

Step 4: Legal Framework Analysis

Laws matter. In many countries, certain laws are used to target specific groups. For example, blasphemy laws in Pakistan, anti-homosexuality laws in Uganda, or anti-terrorism laws in Turkey. We analyse the legal framework in the applicant's home country. We ask: what laws exist that could be used against this person?[5]

We also look at how laws are applied in practice. A law may exist on paper but never be enforced. Or a law may be applied selectively against certain groups. This distinction is important. Judges want to know not just what the law says, but how it is actually used. Therefore, we combine legal analysis with evidence of how authorities apply the law. For more on how human rights intersect with legal systems, see our analysis section.

Step 5: Return Scenario

This is often the most important part of the report. We ask: what specifically happens if this person is returned? We consider the full journey. What happens at the airport or border? Will they be identified? Will authorities question them? What happens when they reach their home area?[6]

We base the return scenario on documented evidence. For instance, in some countries, failed asylum seekers are arrested upon arrival. In others, they are monitored by security services. We look at what has happened to people who were returned in similar situations. Additionally, we consider whether the person's asylum claim itself creates a new risk. In some countries, the act of seeking asylum abroad is seen as disloyalty. The return scenario brings the entire assessment together into a concrete picture that judges can understand.

Step 6: Internal Relocation Viability

Judges often ask whether the applicant could move to a different part of their country to avoid persecution. This is called "internal relocation" or "internal flight alternative." We assess whether this is realistic. Several factors are relevant. First, can the person actually reach the other area safely? Second, would they face the same risks there? Third, can they live a normal life in that area?[7]

In many cases, internal relocation is not viable. This is true when the threat comes from the state, because the state controls the entire country. It is also true when the threat comes from powerful non-state actors who operate across regions. Furthermore, practical barriers matter. Can the person find housing and work? Do they have family or community support? Would they face discrimination or hardship? We assess all of these factors with reference to specific evidence from the country in question.

Step 7: State Protection Assessment

The final step asks whether the state can protect the person from harm. In refugee law, protection means effective protection, not just laws on paper. We look at whether the police investigate crimes against people in the applicant's situation. We check whether the courts are independent. We assess whether there is a pattern of impunity for the type of harm the applicant fears.[8]

State protection is often weak or absent for certain groups. For example, domestic violence victims in some countries receive no meaningful police response. LGBTQ+ individuals may face prosecution rather than protection. Political activists may find that the police are the source of the threat. Therefore, our assessment goes beyond what the law promises. It looks at what actually happens when people seek help from authorities. This is what judges need to see in an asylum expert report.

The assessment of risk must be individualised. A general statement about country conditions is not sufficient. The decision-maker must consider the specific circumstances of the applicant.
UNHCR, Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status, para 42

Conclusion

Our return risk methodology provides a clear, structured approach to assessing whether a person faces danger if returned to their home country. Each of the seven steps builds on the previous one. Together, they create a complete picture. The individual risk profile identifies who the person is. Country conditions set the context. Pattern matching shows whether the risk is documented. Legal framework analysis identifies the laws that could be used against them. The return scenario describes what actually happens. Internal relocation and state protection address the key legal questions that judges must answer.

This methodology has been tested across 363 cases in more than 50 countries. It produces reports that meet the standards judges expect. If you are a lawyer or legal representative who needs an expert report, visit our Find an Expert Witness page. We are ready to help you build the strongest possible case for your client. For more resources, explore our full asylum guide.