How to Identify Evidence Gaps in Pakistan Country Reports Before Instructing an Expert

Preparing an asylum or human rights case involving Pakistan may require more than identifying general information about conditions in the country. Legal representatives also need to consider whether the available country evidence addresses the specific factual issues arising in the case.

Pakistan country reports, Country Policy and Information Notes (CPINs), published research and other reliable sources can provide useful background. However, the relevance of that material depends on its scope, currency and relationship to the circumstances of the individual case.

Identifying potential evidence gaps before instructing a Pakistan country expert can help solicitors define the questions requiring further examination. It can also help establish whether additional country evidence may be relevant and what matters an expert could properly be asked to address.

What Is an Evidence Gap in Pakistan Country Evidence?

An evidence gap arises when the available material does not adequately address a relevant question about country conditions or the circumstances relied upon in a case.

It does not necessarily mean that the existing evidence is incorrect or unreliable. A source might be accurate within its stated scope while providing limited information about a particular location, group, event or factual circumstance.

For example, a report may describe the general position concerning a religious community in Pakistan without examining a specific issue relevant to an individual claim. In another case, country information may describe the formal legal framework without providing sufficient detail about its practical operation in the circumstances under consideration.

Potential evidence gaps may concern:

• The date and scope of available country information.
• Conditions affecting a particular religious, ethnic, political or social group.
• The relevance of national information to a specific location.
• The practical operation of state protection.
• Internal relocation in the context of an individual factual profile.
• The country context surrounding a particular activity or event.
• Conflicting, incomplete or limited information from different sources.

Whether a gap is material depends on the issues arising in the individual case. Not every unanswered question requires a separate expert report.

Why Review Existing Country Evidence Before Instructing an Expert?

A preliminary review can help legal representatives distinguish between information already available and questions that may require further specialist analysis.

Without identifying the precise issue, an instruction to a Pakistan country expert might be too broad. It may also request information already addressed in existing reports or published sources.

A focused review can help establish what is known, what remains unclear and whether the unresolved issue falls within a country expert's area of expertise.

Establishing What Is Already Known

The first step is to identify what the available country evidence actually says.

This may involve reviewing relevant CPINs, published country reports, research by recognised organisations and other reliable sources. The aim is to understand the information available, its limitations and its relevance to the case.

Identifying What Remains Unclear

After reviewing the existing material, identify the specific question that remains unresolved.

For example, the available evidence may discuss a broad group without addressing a particular subgroup or circumstance. Alternatively, several sources may discuss an issue without providing sufficient detail about the context relevant to the claim.

The question should be defined as precisely as possible.

Considering Whether Expert Evidence May Be Relevant

Not every gap in the evidence requires a country expert.

Some questions may be addressed through additional documentary research, clarification of the factual instructions or further material from the client. Other questions may require specialist knowledge of Pakistan's social, political, religious, legal or regional circumstances.

The purpose of the review is to establish what remains to be examined and whether the question falls within the scope of a country expert's expertise.

Reviewing Pakistan CPINs and Published Country Reports

Country Policy and Information Notes are an important source of country information in UK asylum and human rights cases. Their relevance should be considered alongside the individual facts and other available evidence.

A CPIN may address general country conditions, a particular profile or a specific issue such as state protection or internal relocation. The scope varies between documents.

When reviewing Pakistan CPINs and other country reports, solicitors may wish to consider the following points.

Check the Publication Date and Information Cut-Off

Country information can change, and a document's publication date may differ from the cut-off date for the information it contains.

Practitioners should check whether a report has been updated, whether an earlier version has been replaced or withdrawn, and whether relevant developments occurred after the information cut-off.

A newer source is not automatically more relevant in every respect. Its value depends on the subject, the information it contains and the question being considered.

Examine the Scope of the Source

A report may cover a broad subject without examining every issue arising within it.

For example, information about religious freedom in Pakistan may not address every circumstance involving a particular religious practice or community. Similarly, a report about political conditions may not cover every form of political participation or every individual profile.

The scope of the source should therefore be compared with the question that needs to be addressed.

Consider the Sources and Methodology

The reliability and relevance of country information depend partly on how it was obtained and presented.

Where appropriate, practitioners can examine:

• The identity and expertise of the source.
• The date of publication and underlying information.
• The sources cited in support of the findings.
• The geographical and subject-matter coverage.
• Any stated limitations or qualifications.
• Whether other reliable sources provide relevant additional information.

Differences between sources should be examined in context rather than assuming that disagreement necessarily makes one source unreliable.

Check Whether the Evidence Addresses the Individual Profile

General country information may provide useful background, but the factual circumstances of a case can raise more specific questions.

The review should identify whether the existing material addresses the claimant's relevant profile, activities, location, history and alleged circumstances.

This does not mean that every individual detail requires a separate country report. The focus should remain on questions material to the issues being considered.

Common Evidence Gaps in Pakistan Asylum Cases

Potential evidence gaps vary between cases. The following examples illustrate areas that may warrant further review where they are relevant to the factual issues.

Religious or Sectarian Circumstances

A source may describe the general position of a religious or sectarian group without addressing a particular practice, community or set of circumstances.

Depending on the case, further questions may concern the claimant's religious background, activities, visibility within a community or the context surrounding an alleged incident.

General information about a group does not, by itself, resolve every question concerning an individual's circumstances.

Political Activity and Affiliation

Cases involving political activity may raise questions about the nature and extent of the activity, the claimant's role, the relevant political context and the circumstances in which the activity took place.

Existing reports may cover political parties or national developments without addressing every form of participation or individual profile.

Where these matters are relevant, the review should identify what the existing evidence establishes and whether a specific country question remains unanswered.

Gender-Based Violence and Family Circumstances

Cases involving gender-based violence, family disputes or alleged honour-based harm may raise questions about social context, family relationships, access to protection and the practical circumstances affecting the person concerned.

The relevant evidence will depend on the nature of the alleged harm and the factual issues in the case.

Broad descriptions of social attitudes should not be treated as conclusive evidence about every family, community or locality.

Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity

Cases involving sexual orientation or gender identity may require consideration of the particular country issues relevant to the claimant's circumstances.

Potential questions may concern social attitudes, family or community responses, privacy, visibility, relevant legal provisions or the context surrounding an alleged threat.

The scope of the existing country evidence should be reviewed before deciding whether additional specialist analysis may be useful.

State Protection

Country evidence may describe the legal framework and the institutions responsible for law enforcement and protection. A particular case may also raise questions about how those arrangements relate to the alleged circumstances.

Relevant issues could include the nature of the alleged threat, previous contact with authorities, the location concerned and the available information about the practical operation of protection mechanisms.

The existence of a legal framework does not, by itself, answer every case-specific question. Equally, an allegation of ineffective protection should not be treated as established without considering the relevant evidence.

Internal Relocation

Where internal relocation is a relevant issue, a review may need to establish whether the available country evidence addresses the proposed destination and the circumstances of the claimant.

Potential questions include the geographical reach of the alleged source of harm, the claimant's personal circumstances, relevant local conditions and the practical issues identified by the applicable legal framework.

General information about movement within Pakistan may not address every individual relocation question. The extent of any additional evidence required will depend on the case.

Distinguishing an Evidence Gap From a Factual Dispute

A useful part of the review is determining what kind of issue remains unresolved.

A country evidence gap and a dispute about the claimant's personal account are not the same thing.

A country evidence gap may concern conditions in Pakistan, the operation of a relevant institution or the context surrounding a particular activity.

A factual dispute may instead concern whether an event occurred, what the claimant did, what another person said or whether a particular allegation is supported by the evidence.

A country expert's role is to provide independent evidence within their expertise. An expert should not be asked to determine disputed facts that fall outside their role or to replace the decision-maker's assessment.

Where both country and factual issues arise, the instruction should distinguish them clearly. This helps define the country questions that the expert can properly examine.

Preparing Focused Questions for a Pakistan Country Expert

Once a potential evidence gap has been identified, consider whether it can be addressed through a focused instruction.

A useful instruction should explain the issue requiring specialist country knowledge and identify the factual context necessary to examine it.

Explain the Relevant Background

Provide the expert with the relevant background and identify which facts are agreed, which are disputed and which are assumptions for the purpose of the instruction.

The expert should have sufficient context to understand the question without being directed towards a predetermined conclusion.

Identify the Specific Country Question

Avoid relying solely on broad requests such as asking the expert to explain conditions in Pakistan.

Instead, identify the issue that requires examination. Depending on the case, this might concern a particular location, community, activity, social structure or aspect of state protection.

The question should be sufficiently focused to allow the expert to identify relevant sources and explain limitations in the available information.

Explain What Has Already Been Reviewed

Where relevant, provide the country reports, CPINs and other material already considered.

This helps establish the existing evidential position and allows the expert to understand why further analysis is being requested. It can also reduce unnecessary duplication of information already available.

Avoid Leading Questions

Instructions should not assume that the country evidence supports a particular outcome.

Questions should allow the expert to examine relevant information independently, identify differences between sources and explain where the available evidence is limited or inconclusive.

The expert's conclusions should arise from the evidence and their specialist knowledge, not from an expected result.

A Practical Checklist Before Instructing a Pakistan Country Expert

Before commissioning a report, solicitors may find it useful to work through the following checklist.

1. Define the Issue

Identify the precise country-related question arising from the case.

2. Review Existing Material

Check the relevant Pakistan CPINs, published reports and other available country information.

3. Check Currency and Scope

Record relevant publication dates, information cut-off dates and any changes to the status of the material.

4. Identify What the Evidence Establishes

Separate information that is adequately covered from matters that remain uncertain or insufficiently addressed.

5. Distinguish Country Questions From Factual Disputes

Identify which issues require country expertise and which concern the claimant's account or other evidence.

6. Assess Whether the Gap Is Material

Consider whether the unresolved question is relevant to the issues in the case and whether further country evidence may be useful.

7. Define the Expert's Remit

Prepare focused questions that fall within the expert's expertise and do not require the expert to determine the legal outcome.

8. Provide Relevant Instructions and Documents

Supply the material needed to understand the case and the specific issue requiring examination.

9. Allow for Independent Analysis

The expert should be able to consider relevant evidence, explain competing information and identify limitations without being directed towards a particular conclusion.

When Further Pakistan Country Evidence May Not Be Necessary

Identifying a possible gap does not automatically mean that a further expert report should be commissioned.

The existing material may already address the relevant issue sufficiently for the purposes of the case. Alternatively, the question might be better addressed through clarification of the factual evidence, additional documentary material or legal submissions.

A further report might also be unnecessary where the proposed question falls outside the expert's expertise or would require the expert to make findings that properly belong to the decision-maker.

The decision to instruct an expert should therefore be based on the specific issue, the existing evidence and the purpose of the proposed report.

Instructing a Pakistan Country Expert

Where a review identifies a material country question that may require specialist knowledge, a focused instruction can help define the scope of the work.

Pakistan country expert evidence may be considered where the relevant issue requires independent analysis of country conditions, local context, social or political circumstances, religious matters or other subjects within the expert's expertise.

The instruction should identify the question clearly, provide relevant background and allow the expert to reach an independent, evidence-based opinion.

Legal representatives can use the Send a Brief page to provide relevant case information. Available report categories can also be reviewed on the Pakistan expert reports page.

Conclusion

Identifying evidence gaps before instructing a Pakistan country expert involves more than checking whether a report exists on the broad subject of a claim.

The review should establish what the available country information covers, whether it remains current, how closely it relates to the individual factual profile and what questions remain unresolved.

A clear distinction between country evidence gaps and factual disputes can help define the expert's role. Where further specialist evidence is considered relevant, focused instructions can keep the report directed towards the country questions requiring independent examination.

The objective is to ensure that any proposed expert evidence has a clear purpose, is based on relevant material and remains within the expert's area of expertise.

Disclaimer: This article provides general information about identifying evidence gaps in Pakistan country reports before instructing an expert. It is not legal advice and does not determine whether expert evidence is required or appropriate in any individual case. The relevant facts, available evidence and applicable legal framework should be considered separately in each case.

Last Reviewed: October 2026