A Tajik man has been granted the right to remain in the United Kingdom after successfully arguing that he would face persecution in his home country for refusing to shave his beard. The case, first reported by The Telegraph, underscores how personal religious expression can form the basis of asylum claims.
The asylum seeker, whose identity remains undisclosed, had his initial claim rejected by the UK Home Office. On appeal, he argued that Tajik authorities routinely detain bearded men, forcibly shave them, and collect their fingerprints. He maintained that he would only shave his beard out of fear of harm, not due to personal preference or societal expectations.
Tajikistan has in recent years pursued an unofficial campaign linking beards to religious extremism. A BBC investigation found that in one region alone, police forcibly shaved nearly 13,000 men as part of an “anti-radicalisation” drive. Human Rights Watch has similarly documented cases of men with beards being detained, fingerprinted, and groomed under duress.
The appellant’s legal team contended that his beard is a core element of his religious identity as a practicing Muslim, and that being compelled to shave it under threat would constitute a violation of his human rights. The appeal was evaluated under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which prohibits torture and inhuman or degrading treatment.
In his ruling, Deputy Judge Parminder Saini of the UK’s Upper Tribunal stated that the initial judge failed to adequately assess the true reasons the man would remove his beard. “If he wears a beard out of religious conviction but will conform for reasons of securing his safety, he may be entitled to international protection,” Saini wrote.
The judge also noted that credible background evidence, such as widespread reports of arbitrary detentions and forced grooming, had not been properly considered in the original decision. “Thousands of Tajik men have had their beards forcibly shaved. These examples were relevant and should have informed the tribunal’s decision,” he added.
The case has been remanded to the First-tier Tribunal for a fresh hearing.
This ruling illustrates how deeply personal expressions of faith, such as maintaining a beard, can warrant legal protection when in conflict with state practices in the country of origin. It also reflects the complex legal and evidentiary hurdles asylum seekers must overcome to prove a credible fear of persecution.
