Asylum seeker can stay in Britain after having affair

Telegraph

27-05-2025

An Iraqi asylum seeker has won the right to stay in the UK after claiming the shame of an extra-marital affair has prevented him from getting a new ID card so he can return.
The unnamed 32-year-old claimed he was at risk of an 'honour killing' if he went back to Iraq because of the relationship he had with a woman outside marriage.
He told an immigration tribunal that because of the shame the affair had brought on their respective families, he was unable to get anyone in Iraq to provide him with the ID card that he would need to return.
Previous tribunals have recognised that Iraqis without IDs are at risk of persecution and violence if they attempt to return and cross through checkpoints to get home.
Returning them to their home country would therefore amount to a potential breach of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which protects against persecution.
The Home Office appealed the lower immigration tribunal's decision to grant him refugee protection, arguing that the judge had made an error in law.
Lawyers for the department pointed to official guidance which decreed that a threat of honour killing against a man was not sufficient reason to grant asylum.
However, an upper tribunal rejected the Home Office appeal and backed the Iraqi asylum seeker's claim for refugee protection, allowing him to remain in the UK.
The case, disclosed in court papers, is the latest example uncovered by The Telegraph where illegal migrants or convicted foreign criminals have been able to remain in the UK or halt their deportations on human rights grounds.
Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, has announced plans to curb judges' powers to block deportations with new legally enforced 'common sense' rules to clarify how judges interpret human rights laws and strengthen the public interest test.
The lower immigration tribunal was told the Iraqi did not have access to his ID document, which was left in Iraq, and that he did not have any contact with his family there.
The judge said: 'Drawing the strands together and reminding myself of the lower standard, I accept that he was in a relationship with X outside of marriage and this brought adverse attention to them both, which caused them to flee.
'I accept that it [his ID document] was left in Iraq and because of the shame that the appellant has brought upon their respective families, he is unable to have someone provide it to him.'
The tribunal also accepted that men, as much as women, could be victims of honour crimes, which meant he had a 'well-founded' fear of return to Iraq. This meant the Iraqi's appeal against his removal on asylum and human rights grounds was allowed.
'The grounds of [the Home Office's] appeal are misconceived. The determination does not contain an error of law, material or otherwise,' the court ruled.
'The judge correctly applied the applicable law… the determination shall stand.'