Iraqi drug dealer ‘too Westernised to be deported'
An Iraqi drug dealer escaped being deported after claiming that he had been in the UK for so long that he had become too 'Westernised' to return to his home country.
The convicted criminal was sentenced to five years and four months behind bars for dealing cocaine following a crown court trial in 2015.
He had unsuccessfully tried to claim asylum in 2010 – nine years after entering Britain – but was granted indefinite leave to remain.
The Home Office sought to deport him following his release from jail but a lower immigration tribunal ruled he was eligible to remain in Britain.
However, this was overruled by an upper tribunal judge after the Home Office appealed the lower court's decision.
The case will now be reconsidered.
Convict 'at risk of persecution'
The Iraqi man claimed that deporting him would be in breach of his Article 8 rights to a family life under the European Convention on Human Rights. He has a young daughter who is a British citizen.
The court was told: 'It was also said that [his] return to Iraq was not feasible and that he possessed several 'aggravating factors'.'
These factors included his 24-year absence from Iraq, which would mean he would return as a 'single lone male and failed asylum seeker, without documentation and with a Westernised profile which, taken collectively, demonstrated [he] had 'a much higher likelihood of being targeted and persecuted should he be forced to return to Iraq'.'
The man and his lawyers argued he was too 'Westernised' to return to Iraq and people in the Middle East country would be suspicious of him.
'It was said that, as a failed asylum seeker, [he] would be arrested under the criminal code, he would be viewed with suspicion returning as a single man without any family support or anyone to vouch for him and he would not be able to access health care, accommodation or employment,' the court was told.
'He would not be able to obtain documentation and he would face persecution because he would be viewed as 'Westernised' ... because of his social and cultural attitudes and beliefs.'
Father 'no longer danger to community'
The Iraqi man had also unsuccessfully applied for a European Economic Area residence card – which allows non-EU citizens to live and work in the UK – as he was the partner of a Hungarian woman with whom he had a daughter in 2014.
The court also debated whether he remained a danger to the community in the UK. At the lower tribunal hearing, a judge ruled he was not, as he had not reoffended and had shown himself to be a responsible family man.
'He had now been out of prison for over five years and there was confidence that he would shy away from criminality and focus on enjoying his family life with his partner and child,' the court was told.
At the latest hearing, Upper Tribunal Judge Anna-Rose Landes ruled the previous judge made mistakes in the law relating to his 'Westernisation' and refugee status.
Judge Landes said a new hearing must take place to determine whether the man was entitled to asylum status or 'humanitarian protection' under UK law.
Both forms of protection are similar and offer permission to stay in the UK. However, asylum seekers who do not meet the criteria for refugee status can be considered for humanitarian protection.
Judge Landes said: 'If the Iraqi is not a refugee then he would qualify for humanitarian protection.'
She also found he successfully 'rebutted the presumption that he constitutes a danger to the community.'
A new hearing will take place at a later date.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Rhyl Journal
2 hours ago
- Rhyl Journal
Families of Chinook crash victims to launch legal action against MoD
They want a High Court judge to be able to review information which they say was not included in previous investigations, and which they believe will shed new light on the airworthiness of the helicopter. RAF Chinook ZD576 was carrying 25 British intelligence personnel from RAF Aldergrove in Northern Ireland to a conference at Fort George near Inverness when it crashed in foggy weather on June 2, 1994. All 25 passengers – made up of personnel from MI5, the Royal Ulster Constabulary and the British Army – were killed, along with the helicopter's four crew members. The families of the victims, who have coalesced into the Chinook Justice Campaign, said failing to order a public inquiry is a breach of the UK Government's human rights obligations. In a letter to the Government 31 years after the crash, the group said: 'The investigations conducted to date, whether considered individually or in combination, have failed to discharge the investigative duty.' They have also called for the release of documents that were sealed at the time of the crash for 100 years, something revealed in a BBC documentary last year. Solicitor Mark Stephens, who is representing the families, said: 'In this case, the families of those who were killed have seen more than enough evidence to convince them, and us, that there was a failure by the MoD to apply appropriate safeguards in order to protect the passengers and crew. 'In fact, they were put on board an aircraft that was known to be positively dangerous and should never have taken off. 'That is why we are seeking a judicial review into the Government's failure to hold a public inquiry – which the families have sought for more than a year.' Following the crash, the Chinook's pilots, Flight Lieutenants Richard Cook and Jonathan Tapper, were accused of gross negligence, but this verdict was overturned by the UK Government 17 years later, following a campaign by the families. A subsequent review by Lord Philip set out 'numerous concerns' raised by those who worked on the Chinooks, with the MoD's testing centre at Boscombe Down in Wiltshire declaring the Chinook Mk2 helicopters 'unairworthy' prior to the crash. Esme Sparks, who was seven years old when her father Major Gary Sparks was killed in the crash, said: 'We don't want to have to take legal action against the Government and MoD but we do want and need answers surrounding the circumstance of this crash. 'We want to know who or what is being protected? Who made the decision to let this helicopter take off? What is being hidden? In our view, a public inquiry is key.' Andy Tobias, who was eight when his father, Lt Col John Tobias, 41, was killed, said: 'It's clear to me that a complete lack of duty of care was given to those passengers because they got on a Chinook that wasn't fit for flight. 'And really, the government need to show their duty of candour and really be open and transparent about what's in those documents and give us the opportunity to really understand anything that's in them that could give us more answers about what happened.' The MoD said that records held in The National Archives contain personal information and early release of those documents would breach their data protection rights. An MoD spokesperson said: 'The Mull of Kintyre crash was a tragic accident and our thoughts and sympathies remain with the families, friends and colleagues of all those who died.'
South Wales Argus
2 hours ago
- South Wales Argus
Families of Chinook crash victims to launch legal action against MoD
They want a High Court judge to be able to review information which they say was not included in previous investigations, and which they believe will shed new light on the airworthiness of the helicopter. RAF Chinook ZD576 was carrying 25 British intelligence personnel from RAF Aldergrove in Northern Ireland to a conference at Fort George near Inverness when it crashed in foggy weather on June 2, 1994. All 25 passengers – made up of personnel from MI5, the Royal Ulster Constabulary and the British Army – were killed, along with the helicopter's four crew members. The families of the victims, who have coalesced into the Chinook Justice Campaign, said failing to order a public inquiry is a breach of the UK Government's human rights obligations. In a letter to the Government 31 years after the crash, the group said: 'The investigations conducted to date, whether considered individually or in combination, have failed to discharge the investigative duty.' They have also called for the release of documents that were sealed at the time of the crash for 100 years, something revealed in a BBC documentary last year. Solicitor Mark Stephens, who is representing the families, said: 'In this case, the families of those who were killed have seen more than enough evidence to convince them, and us, that there was a failure by the MoD to apply appropriate safeguards in order to protect the passengers and crew. 'In fact, they were put on board an aircraft that was known to be positively dangerous and should never have taken off. 'That is why we are seeking a judicial review into the Government's failure to hold a public inquiry – which the families have sought for more than a year.' Following the crash, the Chinook's pilots, Flight Lieutenants Richard Cook and Jonathan Tapper, were accused of gross negligence, but this verdict was overturned by the UK Government 17 years later, following a campaign by the families. A subsequent review by Lord Philip set out 'numerous concerns' raised by those who worked on the Chinooks, with the MoD's testing centre at Boscombe Down in Wiltshire declaring the Chinook Mk2 helicopters 'unairworthy' prior to the crash. Esme Sparks, who was seven years old when her father Major Gary Sparks was killed in the crash, said: 'We don't want to have to take legal action against the Government and MoD but we do want and need answers surrounding the circumstance of this crash. 'We want to know who or what is being protected? Who made the decision to let this helicopter take off? What is being hidden? In our view, a public inquiry is key.' Andy Tobias, who was eight when his father, Lt Col John Tobias, 41, was killed, said: 'It's clear to me that a complete lack of duty of care was given to those passengers because they got on a Chinook that wasn't fit for flight. 'And really, the government need to show their duty of candour and really be open and transparent about what's in those documents and give us the opportunity to really understand anything that's in them that could give us more answers about what happened.' The MoD said that records held in The National Archives contain personal information and early release of those documents would breach their data protection rights. An MoD spokesperson said: 'The Mull of Kintyre crash was a tragic accident and our thoughts and sympathies remain with the families, friends and colleagues of all those who died.'
Powys County Times
2 hours ago
- Powys County Times
Families of Chinook crash victims to launch legal action against MoD
The families of those killed in a Chinook helicopter crash on the Mull of Kintyre in 1994 have said they are beginning legal action against the Ministry of Defence (MoD) for not ordering a public inquiry. They want a High Court judge to be able to review information which they say was not included in previous investigations, and which they believe will shed new light on the airworthiness of the helicopter. RAF Chinook ZD576 was carrying 25 British intelligence personnel from RAF Aldergrove in Northern Ireland to a conference at Fort George near Inverness when it crashed in foggy weather on June 2, 1994. All 25 passengers – made up of personnel from MI5, the Royal Ulster Constabulary and the British Army – were killed, along with the helicopter's four crew members. The families of the victims, who have coalesced into the Chinook Justice Campaign, said failing to order a public inquiry is a breach of the UK Government's human rights obligations. In a letter to the Government 31 years after the crash, the group said: 'The investigations conducted to date, whether considered individually or in combination, have failed to discharge the investigative duty.' They have also called for the release of documents that were sealed at the time of the crash for 100 years, something revealed in a BBC documentary last year. Solicitor Mark Stephens, who is representing the families, said: 'In this case, the families of those who were killed have seen more than enough evidence to convince them, and us, that there was a failure by the MoD to apply appropriate safeguards in order to protect the passengers and crew. 'In fact, they were put on board an aircraft that was known to be positively dangerous and should never have taken off. 'That is why we are seeking a judicial review into the Government's failure to hold a public inquiry – which the families have sought for more than a year.' Following the crash, the Chinook's pilots, Flight Lieutenants Richard Cook and Jonathan Tapper, were accused of gross negligence, but this verdict was overturned by the UK Government 17 years later, following a campaign by the families. A subsequent review by Lord Philip set out 'numerous concerns' raised by those who worked on the Chinooks, with the MoD's testing centre at Boscombe Down in Wiltshire declaring the Chinook Mk2 helicopters 'unairworthy' prior to the crash. Esme Sparks, who was seven years old when her father Major Gary Sparks was killed in the crash, said: 'We don't want to have to take legal action against the Government and MoD but we do want and need answers surrounding the circumstance of this crash. 'We want to know who or what is being protected? Who made the decision to let this helicopter take off? What is being hidden? In our view, a public inquiry is key.' Andy Tobias, who was eight when his father, Lt Col John Tobias, 41, was killed, said: 'It's clear to me that a complete lack of duty of care was given to those passengers because they got on a Chinook that wasn't fit for flight. 'And really, the government need to show their duty of candour and really be open and transparent about what's in those documents and give us the opportunity to really understand anything that's in them that could give us more answers about what happened.' The MoD said that records held in The National Archives contain personal information and early release of those documents would breach their data protection rights.
