Home Office used ‘AI hallucinated’ information to refuse asylum claim, judge suggests

The case relates to a Moroccan woman and her child who fled the country after experiencing extreme violence. Photograph: gbimages/Alamy View image in fullscreen The case relates to a Moroccan woman and her child who fled the country after experiencing extreme violence. Photograph: gbimages/Alamy Home Office used ‘AI hallucinated’ information to refuse asylum claim, judge suggests Upper tribunal unable to find document cited in case and claims it is ‘analogous to relying on bogus evidence’ UK politics live – latest updates A senior judge has accused the Home Office of relying on “AI hallucinated” information to refuse an asylum claim. The case relates to a Moroccan woman and her child who fled her country after experiencing forced underage marriage and extreme violence, including rape. The woman claimed asylum on the basis of fears that she would be killed by her husband: a powerful, previously convicted criminal. The Home Office refused her case, citing evidence from a supposedly independent and authoritative document known as a country policy information note (CPIN), which they said confirmed that Morocco would be safe for her. But the document could not be found, although its existence was relied upon by a judge who rejected her appeal against the Home Office’s refusal decision in an immigration court known as the first tier tribunal. The woman lodged a further appeal to a more senior court, the upper tribunal, where another judge raised concerns about the unlocated document. In a decision on 14 July, the judge said: “It appears that no such CPIN has ever existed.” He added in relation to the missing document: “No such document has been located in the public domain and moreover the Home Office’s country policy and information team has been unable to confirm its existence.” He said that after looking at the Home Office’s letter refusing the woman’s asylum claim, “it bears hallmarks consistent with the use of artificial intelligence. It may therefore transpire that references to country information note Morocco July 2021 in that letter are a result of an AI ‘hallucination’. If so that would represent an extremely serious failing on the part of the respondent [Home Office].” In a further critical statement, the judge said that relying on a document that does not exist is “analogous to relying on bogus evidence”. He determined that the issue was a “procedural irregularity”. The Guardian asked the Home Office if the document existed and where it was. After initially sending a link to an archive where the document could not be found, the Home Office produced a different document, a piece of unpublished internal guidance known as a country information note (CIN). No CPIN has been published on Morocco since 2017. In the course of the case, the Home Office’s references changed from the internal guidance CIN to the CPIN, which are generally treated as authoritative by judges. Britain promised to protect Hongkongers from China. Why does it now seem ready