A Nigerian actress and model is seeking asylum in the United Kingdom, claiming that her public visibility and past political activism place her at risk of harm if she is returned to Nigeria.
The woman—identified only as OO by the court to protect her identity—argues that her celebrity status heightens the danger she could face upon deportation. She also cites her involvement in organizing and participating in an October 2020 demonstration in support of the End SARS movement as part of the basis for her claim.
According to Mail Online, she filed a human rights application after arriving in the UK, asserting that she is a “well-known model and actress” who took part in political activism in Nigeria.
Her claim was initially rejected by the UK Home Office after it emerged that she had provided false information regarding her salary on her visa application. However, an immigration judge has now ruled that her case must be reheard, stating that the earlier tribunal did not assess all the facts collectively.
OO first lodged her protection and human rights claim in November 2021, but it was refused in November 2023. She maintains that her role in coordinating an End SARS protest would expose her to targeted harm if she were forced to return.
A judgment summarizing her case stated:
“The essence of her protection claim… was that she has a well-founded fear of harm on return to Nigeria because she coordinated and attended a demonstration in October 2020 in support of the ‘End SARS Movement’. The consequent risk to her safety is enhanced by the fact that she is a well-known model and actress in Nigeria and the daughter of a local politician.”
While she described herself as possessing “celebrity status” in Nigeria, the court noted that her evidence in support of this claim was “vague and limited.”
The tribunal also confirmed that she had indeed misrepresented her salary in her visa application. Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge David Kelly acknowledged that OO had not been classified as a vulnerable witness and that the previous judge may have unfairly assessed her credibility. However, he said these concerns alone did not justify overturning the Home Office decision.
More significantly, the judge found that the earlier tribunal failed to assess whether OO’s political activism would continue upon her return to Nigeria—an important factor in determining the level of risk she might face. He further ruled that the evidence in the case had not been properly examined as a whole, amounting to an error of law.
As a result, the case has been sent back to the First-Tier Tribunal to be reheard before a different judge.
In his remarks, Judge Kelly emphasized the importance of considering all evidence before reaching a conclusion:
“It seems to me to be axiomatic that a fact-finder must not reach his or her conclusion before surveying all the evidence relevant thereto. Just as… one cannot make a cake with only one ingredient, so also frequently one cannot make a case… otherwise than by considering all ingredients together.”