I went for a drink last night with a couple of immigration lawyer friends and they had a lot less sympathy for the AIT than myself. Their line was that the AIT should stop making such politically inspired and illiberal decisions, and that the latest incarnation of AA (Zimbabwe) is just plain wrongly decided. I pointed out that research a couple of years ago on this at the Immigration Advisory Service suggested the proportion of Country Guideline cases that favoured the claimant was actually slightly higher than the general rate, which suggested a certain amount of generosity. Their riposte was that where Country Guideline cases favour claimants, it is always a very restricted class or group of claimants that benefit. Wherever a case affecting a large group of claimants is heard, the decision is always against the claimant. This is certainly the case with Sudan as well as Zimbabwe.
On reflection, my friends have definitely got a point.