Posted on 7 April 2026
A new report examined how asylum claims based on non-religion are understood and assessed within the UK asylum system.
The launch brought together policymakers, parliamentarians, legal practitioners, civil society organisations, researchers and members of the public to discuss emerging evidence on the structural challenges faced by individuals seeking protection on the basis of non-religious identity, including apostasy (leaving a religion). The report contributes to growing migration scholarship examining how refugee protection frameworks engage with religion, belief, and identity.
Drawing on doctoral research conducted in collaboration with Humanists UK, the report identifies persistent gaps in asylum policy and practice affecting non-religious claimants. In particular, it highlights challenges surrounding credibility assessment, evidentiary expectations, and decision-making processes. The findings suggest that both institutional frameworks and individual understandings of apostasy and non-belief can shape how claims are interpreted, sometimes creating barriers to fair protection outcomes.
The report outlines several policy recommendations aimed at improving consistency and fairness in asylum decision-making. These include:
A central feature of the event was the inclusion of lived-experience testimony, highlighting the human consequences of current asylum procedures. One participant reflected on the challenges of articulating experiences of leaving religion within asylum interviews, describing difficulties arising from perceived misunderstandings of apostasy and its social consequences.
Discussion also explored the report’s policy relevance and potential parliamentary engagement. Lizzi Collinge MP, Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Humanists, emphasised the importance of strengthening the evidence base informing debates on asylum reform and ensuring that non-religious claimants are included within wider policy discussions on protection and vulnerability.
Speakers further reflected on the role of academic–civil society collaboration in producing policy-relevant migration research. Contributions from legal practitioners highlighted how recent changes to the asylum system, including reduced access to legal aid and pressures on decision-making quality, may disproportionately affect complex claims such as those based on non-religion.
The event concluded by emphasising the need for continued collaboration between researchers, practitioners and policymakers, alongside the development of practical tools to support improved understanding and assessment of non-religious asylum claims.