THE Supreme Court has found there is almost no evidence that refugees self-inflict torture scars in order to fabricate asylum claims.

A unanimous ruling by Britain’s top court today stated that evidence of “self-infliction by proxy” on the part of asylum-seekers is “almost non-existent.”

The judgement is an embarrassing blow to Home Secretary Sajid Javid whose department often claims asylum-seekers have wounded themselves and are not genuine victims of torture.

The judges also criticised lower courts for dismissing the conclusions of a medical expert who had compiled forensic evidence of torture.

The Supreme Court challenge was brought by a Tamil refugee, a jeweller known only as KV, after the Home Office refused his asylum claim.

KV was arrested by Sri Lankan forces in May 2009 even though he was not a member of the outlawed Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (Tamil Tigers).

He was seized in the final month of the country’s conflict when up to a thousand Tamil civilians were being slaughtered each day, mostly by government shelling.

KV was interned in a camp where his captors burnt his arm with hot metal rods until he passed out.

They then branded his back while he was unconscious. When he woke up, they doused him in petrol and threatened to set him alight.

Two years later he escaped from the torture camp and claimed asylum in Britain in 2011, where the Home Office rejected his case.

Appeal courts upheld the department’s decision, suggesting that KV had asked a third party to scar his body in order to leave fabricated evidence of torture.

The Court of Appeal even said that KV’s doctor was wrong to make conclusions about whether his patient’s scars were consistent with his description of the torture.

The Supreme Court overturned these arguments, supporting KV’s doctor and blasting claims of “self-infliction.”

The judges also accepted that “there was extensive torture by state forces in Sri Lanka in 2009.”

Three leading medical groups jointly intervened in the Supreme Court case.

Theresa Schleicher, casework manager at Medical Justice, welcomed the ruling and the Helen Bamber Foundation hailed the judgement as “a victory for those seeking international protection.”

Sonya Sceats of Freedom from Torture described the Home Office’s treatment of torture victims as “deplorable” and “another symptom of the culture of disbelief that is the hallmark of the hostile environment.”

Ms Sceats said: “We should all be shamed by the almost impossible battle that torture survivors in the UK face to prove they have suffered torture.”