| The claimant, a native of Angola, joined an advocacy organization in the country's Cabinda region. In his role with the organization, he reported on human rights violations committed by the Angolan government against the people of Cabinda. When the government learned of his activities, he was arrested and tortured. With the assistance of other members of his organization, he obtained a passport and fled to Sweden, where he claimed asylum. His claim was initially denied, as the courts found inconsistencies and lack of detail in his claims of torture. On appeal, the Supreme Migrations Court held that while the claimant's account did have some imperfections, he was still able to make out a credible claim for asylum. Referring to a decision by the European Court of Human Rights, the Migrations Court held failure to investigate further the claimant's allegations of torture would violate Swedish domestic law as well as international conventions to which Sweden was a party. The inconsistencies in the claimant's story did not, therefore, make him ineligible for asylum, and the case was remanded for further factual inquiries. |