Criminal avoids deportation to Portugal because of son with special needs
A Portuguese criminal jailed twice for his 'breathtakingly' dangerous driving has avoided deportation because his son shows signs of autism.
Mauro Rodrigues, 20, was ordered to be deported by the Home Office after multiple convictions for dangerous driving and driving while disqualified. It included one incident where he displayed 'breathtaking disregard' for the law and the safety of others after he sped through a 30mph zone at 70mph.
Rodrigues, who came to Britain with his mother aged one, was imprisoned for 12 months at a young offenders institute for seven counts of dangerous driving and driving while uninsured and disqualified.
Within weeks of his release and while appealing his deportation, he was jailed again, for nine weeks, for driving while disqualified.
A lower immigration tribunal initially rejected his appeal against his removal to Portugal, but this was overruled on the basis that it would be 'unduly harsh' on his two-year-old son, who had developmental issues and showed signs of autism.
The ruling that Rodrigues' deportation would breach his rights to a family life under the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR) is the latest case where migrants have used human rights laws to halt their removal or win the right to live in the UK.
It is the fourth case exposed by The Telegraph this week, including an Albanian criminal who avoided deportation after claiming his son had an aversion to foreign chicken nuggets and a Pakistani paedophile jailed for child sex offences who escaped removal as it would be 'unduly harsh' on his children.
On Wednesday, the issues raised by the cases dominated Prime Minister's Questions. Sir Keir Starmer branded as 'wrong' a tribunal decision to allow a Palestinian family to live in the UK after they applied through a scheme for Ukrainian refugees.
He said Parliament, not judges, should make the rules on immigration and pledged Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, would work on closing the loophole.
Under British laws, people can be allowed to remain in the UK if the deportation has an 'unduly harsh' effect on their partner or child.
The UK courts previously ruled Rodrigues's deportation would not be unduly harsh, but at the appeal, Daniel Sternberg, the deputy judge of the upper tribunal, found that it would.
He said new evidence had emerged surrounding his unnamed child which was not known before.
A judgement said: 'In his written statement [Mr Rodrigues] records that [the child's] nursery have become concerned about [their] development and have made referrals to the NHS speech and language therapy team in Barnet and have referred [them] for diagnostic assessment in relation to their development.
'[Rodrigues] continues to play a critical role in [the child's] life. He looks after [the child] with regularity and takes [the child] to nursery and to the early years special educational needs centre which [the child] attends one day a week.
'In his oral evidence [Mr Rodrigues] confirmed that he spent all of the previous week with [the child] and he was trying to spend as much time with [the child] as he could.'
Jadah Charles-Williams, his partner, said their child is due to have an autism assessment. Rodrigues's mother, Ana Guita, said the toddler 'does not play like a normal child' and must 'constantly' be watched to make sure they are safe.
Judge Sternberg concluded: 'We remind ourselves of the statutory provisions which state that the deportation of foreign criminals is in the public interest and the more serious the offence committed, the greater the public interest in deportation.
'In this case, there is a significant public interest in deporting [Mr Rodrigues] from the United Kingdom.'
But Judge Sternberg said due to the child's best interests, Mr Rodrigues must remain in the UK. She said: 'It is apparent that [the child] is delayed in their speech and language development as well as having a limited or no sense of danger and risk.
'From these referrals and the observation report, we conclude that [the child] is highly likely to need a high degree of parental supervision, care and support to ensure their well-being and to help with their development and education.'
She added: 'Taking [the child's] interests as a primary consideration, we are satisfied that it is in [the child's] best interests for [Rodrigues] to remain in the United Kingdom to enable their relationship to continue to develop and for [Rodrigues] to provide care and support to [the child] in their development.'
He added: 'Giving full and appropriate weight to the public interest in the deportation of foreign criminals we conclude on the evidence before us that [Rodrigues'] deportation to Portugal and his separation from [the child] renders the effects of [Rodrigues'] deportation on his child unduly harsh.
'It follows that we conclude that to deport [Rodrigues] would be disproportionate and a breach of ECHR.'
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
NHS faces paying more for US drugs to avoid future Trump tariffs
Britain faces paying more for US drugs as part of a deal to avoid future tariffs from Donald Trump. The NHS will review drug pricing to take into account the 'concerns of the president', according to documents released after a trade agreement was signed earlier this year. White House sources said it expected the NHS to pay higher prices for American drugs in an attempt to boost the interests of corporate America. A Westminster source said: 'There's an understanding that we would look at the drug pricing issue in the concerns of the president.' The disclosure is likely to increase concerns about American interference in the British health service, which has long been regarded as a flashpoint in trade talks. It comes after Rachel Reeves announced a record £29 billion investment in the NHS in last week's spending review. The Chancellor's plans will drive spending on the health service up towards 50 per cent of all taxpayer expenditure by the mid-2030s, according to economists at the Resolution Foundation. The Telegraph has also learnt that under the terms of the trade deal with America, the UK has agreed to take fewer Chinese drugs, in a clause similar to the 'veto' given to Mr Trump over Chinese investment in Britain. The White House has asked the UK for assurances that steel and pharmaceutical products exported to the US do not originate in China, amid fears the deal could be used to 'circumvent' Mr Trump's punishing tariffs on Beijing. Mr Trump is enraged by how much more America pays for drugs compared with other countries and considers it to be the same issue as he has raised on defence spending. Just as the US president has heaped pressure on European nations to increase the GDP share they allocate to defence, he thinks they should spend more on drug development. An industry source said: 'The way we've been thinking about it and many in the administration have been thinking about it, it's more like the model in Nato, where countries contribute some share of their GDP.' Britain and the US 'intend to promptly negotiate significantly preferential treatment outcomes on pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients', the trade deal reads. Pharmaceutical companies are also pushing for reductions in the revenue sales rebates they pay to the NHS under the voluntary scheme for branded medicines pricing, access and growth (VPAG) – a mechanism that the UK uses to make sure the NHS does not overpay. Last week, Albert Bourla, Pfizer's chief executive, said non-US countries were 'free-riding' and called for a US government-led push to make other nations increase their proportionate spend on innovative medicines. He said White House officials were discussing drug prices in trade negotiations with other countries. 'We represent in UK 0.3pc of their GDP per capita. That's how much they spend on medicine. So yes, they can increase prices,' Mr Bourla said. Industry sources said there was no indication yet on what the White House would consider to be a fair level of spending. Whatever the benchmark, Britain will face one of the biggest step-ups. UK expenditure on new innovative medicines is just 0.28pc of its GDP, roughly a third of America's proportionate spending of 0.78pc of its GDP. Even among other G7 nations, the UK is an anomaly. Germany spends 0.4pc of its GDP while Italy spends 0.5pc. Most large pharmaceutical companies generate between half and three quarters of their profits in the US, despite the fact that America typically makes up less than a fifth of their sales. This is because drug prices outside of the US can cost as little as 30pc of what Americans pay. Yet, pharmaceutical companies rely on higher US prices to fund drug research and development, which the rest of the world benefits from. A month ago, Mr Trump signed an executive order titled 'Delivering Most-Favored-Nation Prescription Drug Pricing to American Patients', which hit out at 'global freeloading' on drug pricing. It stated that 'Americans should not be forced to subsidise low-cost prescription drugs and biologics in other developed countries, and face overcharges for the same products in the United States' and ordered his commerce secretary to 'consider all necessary action regarding the export of pharmaceutical drugs or precursor material that may be fuelling the global price discrimination'. Trung Huynh, the head of pharma analysis at UBS, said: 'The crux of this issue is Trump thinks that the US is subsidising the rest of the world with drug prices. 'The president has said he wants to equalise pricing between the US and ex-US. And the way he wants to do it is not necessarily to bring down US prices all the way to where ex-US prices are, but he wants to use trade and tariffs as a pressure point to get countries to increase their prices. 'If he can offset some of the price by increasing prices higher ex-US, then the prices in America don't have to go down so much.' Mr Huynh added: 'It's going to be very hard for him to do. Because [in the UK deal] it hinges on the NHS, which we know has got zero money.' Under VPAG, pharmaceutical companies hand back at least 23pc of their revenue from sales of branded medicines back to the NHS, worth £3bn in the past financial year. The industry is pushing for this clawback to be cut to 10pc, which would mean the NHS would have to spend around 1.54bn more on the same medicines on an annual basis. The Government has already committed to reviewing the scheme, a decision which is understood to pre-date US trade negotiations. A government spokesman said: 'This Government is clear that we will only ever sign trade agreements that align with the UK's national interests and to suggest otherwise would be misleading. 'The UK has well-established and effective mechanisms for managing the costs of medicines and has clear processes in place to mitigate risks to supply.'
Yahoo
11 hours ago
- Yahoo
‘I'll use private sector to help clear NHS backlog', says Streeting
Wes Streeting has said he will consider leaning more heavily on the private sector as he bids to clear NHS waiting lists. The health secretary said he will not be 'bound by outdated ideological battles' when tackling the crisis in the service, where 7.39 million people are currently waiting to be seen by doctors. He said it would be 'foolish to turn away' from the private healthcare sector, but cautioned that 'we must see it for what it is'. Writing in the Sunday Telegraph, Mr Streeting said: 'Some ask if using private capacity contradicts NHS principles. Nonsense. What contradicts NHS principles is letting people suffer unnecessarily when capacity exists to treat them. 'The treatment remains free at the point of use – that's what matters. The independent healthcare sector won't affect this principle, and so it would be foolish to turn it away when we so desperately need it in certain specialities. But at the same time, we must see it for what it is.' The health secretary, who previously received treatment for kidney cancer, added: 'Cancer taught me that time is precious. When you're waiting for treatment, every day matters. That's why I won't waste a single day, or a single available appointment slot, in our mission to give patients the care they deserve.' His comments are likely to spark uproar from MPs on the left of the Labour Party, who fiercely opposed expanding the role of the private sector under Jeremy Corbyn. The former Labour leader has previously accused Sir Keir Starmer of 'betraying' the health service for relying more on private care. The government has said partnerships with the private sector under Labour so far have delivered more than 500,000 treatments, with waiting lists having fallen to a two-year low of 7.39 million in April. Darren Grewcock, a security guard, had hip replacement surgery at the Meriden Hospital through a full NHS referral after an injury left him unable to work. He said: 'The X-rays revealed that I had bone-on-bone osteoarthritis on my left hip. I was referred for surgery and given a list of places you can go – which included options in the independent sector. 'Within three days of booking, I had an appointment booked with the consultant. I couldn't believe how quickly he got back to me and the process started. My recovery has been a huge success. I am fitter, stronger, and more mobile than I was at 50." The charity, Patients Association, welcomed the greater role of the private sector in the NHS. Chief executive Rachel Power said: 'As the NHS continues to tackle the backlog, communication and choice must remain central to how care is delivered because patients don't just need treatment, they need to feel informed and empowered.'
a day ago
UK to hold national inquiry into organized child sex abuse after pressure from Musk
LONDON -- The British government announced Saturday it will hold a national inquiry into organized child sexual abuse, something it has long been pressured to do by opposition politicians — and Elon Musk. Prime Minister Keir Starmer said he would accept a recommendation from an independent reviewer for a judge-led inquiry with the power to summon witnesses. Starmer said he would 'look again' and hold a probe into what the press have dubbed 'grooming gangs' of men who prey on often young and vulnerable women. In some of the most high-profile cases to come to trial, the perpetrators were men of Pakistani heritage, and the issue has been taken up by right-of-center politicians including Reform UK leader Nigel Farage, and stoked by Musk, who took to his X platform to condemn Starmer over the issue. Musk criticized Starmer for not backing a national inquiry into the matter following a request from the local authority in the northern English town of Oldham, where police found girls under 18 were sexually exploited by groups of men in the 2000s and 2010s. Musk also alleged that Starmer failed to bring perpetrators to justice when he was England's chief prosecutor between 2008 and 2013, a charge that the prime minister vigorously denied. Because the cases in Oldham and similar ones in several other towns involved predominantly white girls abused by men largely from Pakistani backgrounds, the issue has been used to link child sexual abuse to immigration, and to accuse politicians of covering up the crimes out of a fear of appearing racist. A 2022 report into what happened in the northwest England town of Oldham between 2011 and 2014 found that children were failed by local agencies, but that there was no cover-up despite 'legitimate concerns' that the far-right would capitalize on 'the high-profile convictions of predominantly Pakistani offenders across the country.' In January the government said it would support several local inquiries into child exploitation in cities where gangs of men were prosecuted. It had previously said there was no need for further investigations following a string of previous inquiries, both local and national. A seven-year inquiry was held under the previous Conservative government, but many of the 20 recommendations it made in 2022 — including compensation for abuse victims — have yet to be implemented. Starmer's government also asked Louise Casey, an expert on victim's rights and social welfare, to review previous findings. Her review has been submitted to the government but has not yet been published. 'I have never said we should not look again at any issue,' Starmer said as he flew to Canada for a Group of Seven summit. 'I have wanted to be assured that on the question of any inquiry. That's why I asked Louise Casey who I hugely respect to do an audit. 'Her position when she started the audit was that there was not a real need for a national inquiry over and above what was going on. She has looked at the material she has looked at and she has come to the view that there should be a national inquiry on the basis of what she has seen. 'I have read every single word of her report and I am going to accept her recommendation.' The main opposition Conservative Party offered a swift response. 'Those in authority deliberately covered up the systematic rape of thousands of girls as young as 10 because the perpetrators were mainly of Pakistani origin. They thought race relations were more important than protecting young girls,'' Conservative law and order spokesman Chris Philp said. 'The truth must now come out and people in positions of authority responsible for the cover up held to account.''
