A man has been told he can remain in Britain after he successfully appealed against an asylum judge who said they did not think his membership to ‘Rainbow Dudes’ proved that he was bisexual.
The Nigerian man put forward his association to Rainbow Dudes, an LGBT+ group, as evidence of his sexuality during his legal fight to avoid deportation to his home country where homosexuality is illegal.
But the asylum seeker faced accusations that he was lying to avoid deportation, as an immigration judge said his membership to the group did not ‘establish he is bisexual’.
Despite attending LGBT+ events with Rainbow Dudes, the man was told that it was not evidence of his sexuality and merely showed his ‘interest in and support for the LGBT community’.
He has now overturned the decision to deny his protection claim, meaning he can remain in Britain.
The Nigerian, who was granted anonymity and named only as KA, claimed he would be ‘forced into hiding’ if he was made to return to his home country.
He said he would be subject to persecution because same-sex romantic or sexual relationships are banned.
His initial application for protection was denied by the Home Office in January 2025.
KA took his fight to the First-tier Tribunal of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber in November 2025 – but the judge at the time did not believe that he was bisexual and dismissed his appeal.
The unnamed First-tier Tribunal judge said: “The [man] relies upon a letter from Kit Sebastian Renard, the Group Leader of Rainbow Dudes who speaks of the [man’s] membership of the group, attendance at its events and contribution to its activities.
“I find that this letter and other documents and photographs concerning LGBT+ events demonstrate [his] interest in and support for the LGBT+ community but do not establish that he is bisexual as he claims.
“The [man] is a member of many groups which he lists as concerning refugees, the local community, volunteers, artist workshops, inter faith and samba.
“He is clearly a person with many interests.
“I attach no weight to the documentation from the Rainbow Dudes, nor other documentation regarding his involvement in the local community, as independent evidence supporting the claim as to his sexuality.”
Rainbow Dudes is a group which meets monthly to support LGBT+ people in Glasgow.
In February 2026 he was granted leave to appeal the decision at the Upper Tribunal of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber.
The Upper Tribunal, sitting in Edinburgh, has now allowed his appeal on asylum grounds.
Deputy Judge of the Upper Tribunal Stuart Neilson said that KA did not even need to prove he was bisexual, and that his activism alone for LGBT rights would lead to him facing persecution in Nigeria.
Judge Neilson found that if KA was to return to Nigeria then he would be at risk of persecution as he ‘would not shrink from who he is’.
Judge Neilson said: “The preserved finding of fact by the First-tier Tribunal is that [KA] is involved in pro-LGBT activism in the UK, and we have no basis upon which to conclude that this work is motivated by anything other than a sincerely held political belief.
“Having had regard to the evidence as a whole we agree with the FtT’s observation that [KA], who describes himself as an artist and activist, does appear to be interested in a number of human rights issues.
“We find that his involvement with the LGBT community is a continuing one.
“If [KA] was perceived by the Nigerian authorities to be an active supporter of the LGBT community then he would be at risk.
“It was also not disputed that if [KA] was perceived to be gay then he would be at risk of persecution if he returned to Nigeria.
“[KA] accepted that he had not advocated for the LGBT community whilst living in Nigeria but that he had since coming to the UK found the freedom to express his beliefs and his desire was to continue to be able to express his belief and support for the LGBT community.
“He said that he would not shrink from who he is and would persist in his beliefs but ultimately accepted that if sent back to Nigeria he would go into hiding as he would come under attack.
“We take that to mean he would suppress his beliefs.”
