Oh Dear! - Can't send them back now

[DimPrawn]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4341226.stm

A failed Zimbabwean asylum seeker has won his battle against deportation.
The unnamed man would be at risk of harm if he were returned to President Robert Mugabe's regime, the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal has ruled.

The test case decision could now prompt a judicial review by the High Court of the government's policy of sending failed asylum seekers back to Zimbabwe.

The government accepts there are human rights abuses in the country, but not that every asylum seeker is at risk.

The fact that the appellant made a false claim...does not alter the fact that the real risk of serious harm exists now

Tribunal ruling

Tim Finch, from the Refugee Council, said they were delighted by the ruling in the test case brought by the Zimbabwean asylum seeker, known only as 'A'.

He said that the judge could not have been clearer in his ruling.

"He said if you are a failed asylum seeker - you're a Zimbabwean you come over here and you make a claim for asylum and it fails - you shouldn't be sent back to Zimbabwe because you face a real risk you will be persecuted just by virtue of coming here and trying to find a place of safety and sanctuary."

He added they believed the security services in Zimbabwe targeted people who were failed asylum seekers.

"Coming to Britain and claiming sanctuary here is regarded as treason by the Mugabe regime," he said.


You couldn't make it up! Open the floodgates people...here they come!

[mcquiggd]

So why did he fail in the first place if its so 'clear cut he would face persecution at home'...?

Why did he make false claims?

Was his defense team on strike, is he a criminal, or just stupid?

From the BBC story:

"Tribunal chairman Mark Ockelton said the man, known only as 'A', had a "well-founded fear of persecution" if he was returned, even though his asylum claim had been "fraudulent" and his dealings with UK authorities "deliberately dishonest".

The very fact that he had spent time in the UK would put him at risk in his home country, he said.

"The fact that the appellant made a false claim, so generating the risk which would otherwise not have existed, does not alter the fact that the real risk of serious harm exists now," the ruling said.


Oh FFS.



Send the judge back to where the asylum seeker came from

[Mailman]

I have a certain amount of sympathy for anyone who is being sent back to Zim. Sh1t, Id lie my tits off too if it meant the difference between staying here or being deported back to Zim.

Mailman

[AtW]

So why did he fail in the first place if its so 'clear cut he would face persecution at home'...?

Perhaps because Home Office's team gets bonus depending on how many asylum seekers they fail?

There is sure as hell a LOT of fraud in asylum, but look at what's going on in Zimbabwe -- clearly the fkwit in charge there uses his power to prosecute political enemies, that's a well known fact. Some time ago Home Office deported person who was known by the many as political opponent -- after deportation he "disappeared", probably dead in some unmarked grave and a bullet in the back of his head.

Asylum is abused, but in this case HO should be extra careful.

[TwoWolves]

So does this mean that we are going to host every sod with a hard-luck story in the world? Is there room in the British Isles for 4.5 billion people?

But think on this?

England has in its dark and bl--dy past had times of civil war and persecution. The reason why its peaceable and genial to live here now is because brave and principled people stood their ground and fought against injustice, often sacrificing their lives in the process.

These people could not hop on a plane to better places, they had to stay and face the music. The incentive to make life at home better.

By taking these people in are we not supporting (indirectly) the regimes from which they flee?

[AtW]

So does this mean that we are going to host every sod with a hard-luck story in the world?

No. Asylum was created to protect those from political persecution -- its a handful of people whose presense in this country is useful because they could form new loyal to the West leadership of their respective countries.

[Mailman]

England has in its dark and bl--dy past had times of civil war

That was what...about 400 years ago...time to let it go I reckon

Mailman

[Not So Wise]

So does this mean that we are going to host every sod with a hard-luck story in the world?

So you volunteering to personally put this guy on a plane knowing beyond reasonble doubt that it is the equivilent of a death sentence?

Him lieing or not in his claim does not change the facts and those facts are simple, the regime in Zimbabwe can and most likely will kill this man upon his return for leaveing the country in the first place.

Goverment knew this as well as we do, they knew forceing him to return not only broke UK law but international law and went against basic human decency and compassion

Now they foolishly have created a test case (one there was never any chance in hell of them winning) than can and most likely will be abused down the road, all because some idiot was trying to keep the numbers down.

[mcquiggd]

Personally, yes.

[PerlOfWisdom]

They'd only have to send a couple back to face the music, and no more would come here.