stated that from X to X he became aware of his sexual orientation and externalised his feelings, a reason which played a decisive role in the applicant's decision to leave the country. In a more general assessment, these allegations of the applicant are considered to be incoherent and general and as a result, the Service finds that the internal credibility of the above allegation has not been established. The above reasoning of the first instance negative decision is indicative of the problematic, judgmental and non-sensitive approach and credibility assessment of the Asylum Service with regard to LGBTQI persons and GBV survivors. Similarly illustrative is the reasoning of a negative decision issued by Kos RAO on September 2024 for an asylum applicant with, inter alia, a homosexuality claim, legally represented by GCR:621 According to the decision: ‘[t]he applicant made vague and general statements regarding the time and circumstances under which he realized he was homosexual. He also spoke vaguely about the romantic relationship he claimed to have had with someone of the same sex. Furthermore, his descriptions were sparse concerning his feelings and the way he experienced his sexuality, lacking any truly personal or experiential details about his sexual orientation. In this context, the applicant did not provide a clear, detailed, and sufficient account of fundamental aspects related to this significant claim. Regarding when he first realized he was homosexual, the applicant vaguely stated: "From when we were in his room watching pornographic movies together, we felt it." (See interview transcript, p. 16). Similarly, his responses to subsequent questions posed by the interviewer did not reflect the narrative of someone recounting personal and experiential changes upon realizing their sexual orientation. When asked about the change in his life after realizing he was homosexual, the applicant vaguely responded: "Yes," and "I feel that I am different from other males." (See interview transcript, p. 17). At another point in the interview, the applicant was again asked to describe his feelings and whether he feared how society would perceive him if it became known that he was homosexual. The applicant vaguely stated: Lawyer: "What feelings or thoughts crossed your mind when you realized you liked boys? Were you afraid of how people would treat you?" Applicant: "I am not afraid." Lawyer: "How can you not be afraid when you've been telling us all along that it is illegal in Iraq?" Applicant: "Yes, it is forbidden, but I don’t need to tell anyone that I am homosexual." (See interview transcript, p. 23). When asked if he knew other homosexual people in his country or if he tried to meet them, the applicant responded in a manner that did not reflect personal experiences, providing information from the internet and social media. The applicant vaguely stated: “Do you know if there are areas, cafés, or other establishments in your city where people attracted to the same sex gather? "No, it is forbidden in Iraq; if they find any homosexual, they kill them." (See interview transcript, p. 17). Do you know other homosexual people in your country? "[the applicant gives a name] if you search that name on the internet, you’ll find him. He was homosexual, and they killed him." Did you personally know [name]? "Yes. ”"How did you know him? "Through social media." “Have you ever met other homosexual people in your country, aside from those already mentioned? ”No." (See interview transcript, p. 18). When asked about the legislation in his country regarding homosexuality, the applicant could not provide any information, even though it directly impacts his life. The applicant vaguely stated: "I have forgotten; you can search on Google." (See interview transcript, p. 19). When asked to describe the incident during which his relationship with his partner became known on the night of June 20, 2024, his account was brief and appeared to lack the perspective of someone with genuine personal experiences. The applicant vaguely stated: "As I told you before, I had been intimate with my boyfriend. Suddenly, his brother opened the door and called his father. I dressed quickly and jumped out the window. His father started shooting at my feet to make me fall, but I managed to escape. I then took a taxi and went home." (See interview transcript, p. 19). Τhe above reasoning of the first instance negative decision is indicative of the problematic, judgmental and non-sensitive approach and credibility assessment of the Asylum Service with regard to LGBTQI persons and GBV survivors. This decision was annulled by the Appeals Authority and the applicant was granted refugee status. 621 More information available on the applicant’s case file, with GCR. 123