Asylum seeker suspected of recruiting child soldiers can stay in Britain
An asylum seeker suspected of recruiting child soldiers for the Tamil Tigers has won a human rights case to stay in Britain.
The Sri Lankan has been allowed to remain in the UK despite claims he had 'enlisted children under the age of 15' in the militant group.
The French justice system previously ruled that he should be denied asylum in France due to the allegations, an immigration tribunal heard.
However, British judges ruled that there was not enough evidence to say the allegations were true, and he has been granted refugee status.
The Home Office, which attempted to deport him, tried to fight the ruling, but lost its appeal.
The identity of the migrant has not been revealed as he was granted anonymity by the Upper Tribunal of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber.
The hearing, in London, was told that before he arrived in the UK, the Sri Lankan was alleged to have recruited child soldiers for the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) - also known as the Tamil Tigers.
The LTTE is a militant terrorist organisation founded in Sri Lanka.
It was heard that the unnamed Sri Lankan was working for the Tamils Rehabilitation Organisation (TRO) - a refugee charity - but was secretly supplying information.
Before arriving in the UK, the French asylum court - the Cour nationale du droit d'asile - found that he 'ought to be excluded from a grant of asylum under Article 1F of the Refugee Convention due to his alleged involvement in war crimes, in this case the alleged recruitment of children'.
In Britain, the Home Office refused him refugee status, but in 2023, he won an appeal at the First-tier Tribunal of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber against the decision.
At the time, the judge found that the Home Office 'had not shown serious grounds for concluding that [the Sri Lankan] was guilty of the war crime of conscription or enlistment of children under the age of 15 or using them to participate actively in hostilities'.
The judge at the 2023 hearing concluded: 'I am not satisfied even on the evidence of his own admissions, accurate or otherwise, to the French that this goes far enough to show that the [Sri Lankan] was effectively collecting information which he knew was going to be misused, and misused specifically for the recruitment of child soldiers under the age of 15.
'Nor am I satisfied that there are serious reasons for considering on all the evidence adduced that the [respondent] has been shown to have knowingly materially assisted in the recruitment of child soldiers under the age of 15, by the work done by the TRO in gathering information, possibly subsequently used by the LTTE for that purpose.'
The Home Office appealed that decision at the Upper Tribunal, but lost its case.
Home Office lawyers argued that the judge in 2023 did not attach enough weight to the French court decision.
Lawyers argued that the judge 'ought to have followed the French Court and that inadequate reasons were given by the judge for not doing so'.
But, Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Adrian Seelhoff ruled that the 2023 hearing considered the French decision 'extensively'.
Judge Seelhoff said: 'The Judge assessed that evidence to see if it supported the [Home Office's] case that [the Sri Lankan], whilst working for the TRO, supplied details which the LTTE used to recruit child soldiers.
'[The Home Office's] position before us was not that the judge was bound to follow the French court decision, but that he had not given adequate reasons for reaching a different decision or that he failed to attach weight to the decision.
'We find that the judge did give adequate reasons for not following that decision, and for the weight he attached to it and that accordingly there is no error of law in the decision under appeal.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Keir Starmer and Labour are accused of standing in the way of a ban on cousins marrying each other - after poll shows British people want it axed
Sir Keir Starmer and the Labour party are standing in the way of a ban on cousins marrying each other, after a new poll showed an overwhelming majority of Britons want to see it axed, a Conservative MP has claimed. Conservative MP Richard Holden last year introduced a private members' bill to ban the practice, which would bring cousin marriages into the same bracket as marrying a parent, child, sibling or grandparent. Now a new YouGov poll has revealed the British communities that are most likely to back first cousin marriages, with a large majority thinking the practice should be outlawed. The former Cabinet Minister and Conservative Party Chairman told MailOnline: 'This YouGov poll is clear. 'The overwhelming majority of Brits, including those of Pakistani heritage, want to see first cousin marriage banned. 'The fact Sir Keir Starmer and the Labour Party are standing in the way of ending an outdated practice rooted in misogynistic cultural practices shows that he's more interested in promoting cultural relativism than in ending practices that have no place in our country and isolate both individuals and communities from each other. 'If Starmer really believed in British values he'd back my bill, just like every community in Britain does.' Pakistani and Bangladeshi Britons are most likely to support the first cousin marriages, with 39 percent of those polled saying it should be legal. While 47 percent of the community say the practice should not be legal, this compares to just eight percent of white Britons who support first-cousin marriage. Six percent of black Britons say marrying a cousin should be legal, with nine percent of Indian Britons holding the same view. While marrying close relatives including siblings and half-siblings is illegal in the UK, marrying a first cousin is technically legal. Some 77 percent of white and Indian Britons believe marrying a cousin should be made illegal, compared to 82 percent of black Britons. Currently the UK follows the practice of 'genetic counselling', in which first cousins who are in a relationship are offered education about the risk of having children together and encouraged to receive extra checks during pregnancy. It is estimated that children of a first-cousin union have a six percent chance of inheriting a recessive disorder such as cystic fibrosis or sickle cell disease - double the risk of the general population. But some have warned that outlawing the practice completely risks stigmatising those already in first cousin marriages in the UK. Amongst these was Independent MP Iqbal Mohamed, who drew huge criticism last year for defending cousin marriage. Instead of banning it outright, he said a 'more positive approach' involving advanced genetic tests for prospective married cousins would be more effective in addressing issues around it. One of Britain's foremost experts on child health also defended the right for first cousins to marry, dismissing concerns about inbreeding. Professor Dominic Wilkinson, an NHS neonatologist and ethics expert at the University of Oxford, argued a ban would be 'unethical'. Instead, Professor Wilkinson backed calls for such couples to be offered special screening on the NHS to help them decide if they should have children. Such tests can cost £1,200 privately. They are designed to spot whether prospective parents are carriers for the same genetic conditions, such as cystic fibrosis and spinal muscular atrophy. It comes as data from 2023 showed in three inner-city Bradford wards, 46 percent of mothers from the Pakistani community are married to a first or second cousin, according to data published in 2023. The overall estimate for the cousing marriage capital of the UK in Pakistani couples was 37 percent ten years ago, and this figure has since dropped. Reasons behind the fall are thought to include high educational attainment, stricter immigration rules and changes in family dynamics. It compares to just one percent of white British couples. YouGov's data also revealed that those in London are most likely to support first cousin marriage, at 15 percent. The north followed at 12 percent, while in the Midlands it was ten percent. The south of England and Wales were the least likely to support it being legal, at six and seven percent respectively. Historically, first cousin marriages were extremely common amongst royalty and the British upper classes. It was seen as a way of firming up alliances and keeping wealth and land in the family. MailOnline recently revealed that no-one is tracking the rate of cousin marriages in the UK, with councils not recording any data on the issue. Studies have put Pakistan as having one of the highest rates globally at 65 percent of unions. This is followed by Saudi Arabia (50 percent), Afghanistan (40 percent), Iran (30 percent) and Egypt and Turkey (20 percent).
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
As Labour risks a civil libertires backlash by hinting ID cards are in the pipeline, the party's former Home Secretery argues... All our digital fingerprints are everywhere, so giving a national identity card to every citizen is a no-brainer
Much ink has been spilt over the Labour Government's shelving of the Rwanda deportation plan. This hopelessly impractical and eye wateringly expensive project was to deter the small boat migrants from making the perilous crossing of the Channel, and after much toing and froing between the courts and Parliament, the first deportation flights were scheduled for July 24 last year. However, the General Election intervened and at his first press conference as Prime Minister Keir Starmer witheringly confirmed that the 'gimmick' scheme was 'dead and buried'. Since then – with some 1,200 migrants making it to English shores in one day alone last week – the numbers of people entering the country illegally have ticked up and up. With each day's figures, the supporters of the Tory's Rwanda plan cry: 'I told you so.'
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
20 years on from the febrile aftermath of London's 7/7 bombings, a heart-stopping minute by minute account of the day Scotland Yard's first ever shoot-to-kill operation ended in the... CATASTROPHIC death of an innocent man
Twenty years ago, London was a city under attack, living on its nerves. Out of the blue that summer of 2005, the capital's transport system was hit by a murderous wave of al-Qaeda bombers, with devastating results. Ordinary folk going about their everyday lives died in the onslaught. Hundreds were mutilated. London knew all about terrorist bombs from years of enduring attacks by various Irish factions. But here was something new to these shores and infinitely more terrifying – the suicide bomber hell-bent on martyrdom. To Commissioner of Police Sir Ian Blair it was a door opening into a new kind of terrorism. 'The IRA and the Loyalists never did anything the size of this. This was a step change.'
