Latest news with #refugee
South China Morning Post
2 hours ago
- Health
- South China Morning Post
For gay Malaysian refugee in UK ‘you have to live authentically – you're saving yourself'
'Growing up in a Muslim family, I was told that liking another person of the same sex was haram,' says Warren Hallett of how Islam forbids homosexuality, considering it sinful. 'My religion teacher said [gay people] were going to hell. 'I knew being me was wrong, but I couldn't change it. And because I couldn't tell anyone, the only way to live was to hide everything. I prayed every night, wishing I would wake up 'straight', 'normal', like everyone else.' Born in Batu Pahat, a small town in Malaysia, where Islam is the state religion, the 53-year-old has since given up his Arabic birth name, married another man and become a policy adviser to the British Home Office. In 2000, Hallett was the first asylum seeker to be granted refugee status in the UK on the grounds of being LGBTQ – lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or queer/questioning. Warren Hallett at a Pride event in the UK with a placard that plays on a Malaysian tourism promotion slogan. Photo: Warren Hallett To mark Pride Month – a global celebration of the LGBTQ community and culture every June – Hallett recalled for the Post how being a gay Malaysian Muslim left him homeless, caused him to turn to sex work and led to two failed suicide attempts. For him, and many others, the path to pride was paved with pain and prejudice.
Mail & Guardian
a day ago
- General
- Mail & Guardian
Judge slams home affairs department for ‘unintelligible, illogical babble' in gay case
The High Court has overturned a Home Affairs official's decision to reject the asylum application of a man who fled his home country after he was imprisoned for homosexuality. Illustration: Lisa Nelson 'Unintelligible, illogical babble.' This is how a Western Cape high court judge described the reasoning of a Judge Gayaat da Silva Salie set aside the rejection of the asylum application and ordered that it be heard afresh by another Refugee Status Determination Officer (RSDO) within six months. The man, identified only as MAM in the judgment, said he fled He came to South Africa on a visitor's visa in May 2023 and was involved in a relationship with a South African doctor. In 2024, he applied for asylum. His last interview was in September 2024. He was then informed that his application had been rejected. In his reasons, the RSDO gave a long explanation of the political system in Chad. He then recorded: 'You were arrested and sentenced because of your sexual orientation and homosexuals are not allowed in your country. You stated that you were released by the court because you have use of a lawyer. 'When I assessed your information concerning homosexuals, there's a separation of powers between the executive and the judicial power in terms of homosexual laws. The government does not allow same-sex relations and the courts released the offenders. Therefore your application has been rejected as unfounded.' MAM, in his submissions, said he could not appeal this decision internally because it was 'unintelligible, irrational and failed to consider the applicable law in Chad'. He said this constituted 'exceptional circumstances' which allowed him to approach a court, without exhausting his internal appeal remedies, as provided for in the Refugees Act. Judge da Silva Salie said MAM had submitted that he fled Chad after being imprisoned solely for being a homosexual man. He said his safety and freedom remain threatened in Chad. He indicated that his family had disowned him and he faced persecution from the state and society at large. However, the respondents — the director general and the minister of home affairs — opposed the application. They argued that the reasons were not only adequate but also clear. They also argued that the matter did not meet the threshold of 'exceptional circumstances' to approach a court for judicial scrutiny without exhausting internal remedies. Da Silva Salie said the RSDO had concluded that the applicant's asylum claim was 'unfounded' relying primarily on the assertion that the judiciary in Chad is independent, and that although homosexuality is criminalised, some courts had released offenders. 'I find the argument that these reasons were clear and adequate to be rather problematic. 'They are contradictory and factually incoherent. The RSDO accepts the facts of criminalisation of homosexuality whilst simultaneously rejecting the credibility of his claim of fear of future persecution. 'This reflects a profound misunderstanding of the legal standards governing asylum, especially the well-founded fear of persecution provided for in the Refugees Act.' She noted that the RSDO had also disregarded the legal framework that governed asylum decisions and South Africa's international obligations to the rights of LGBTQI+ people. 'The theoretical independence of the judiciary cannot override the reality that consensual same-sex conduct remains criminalised in Chad and that the applicant was prosecuted and imprisoned under those laws,' she said. 'If anything, the position can only be worse for him should he return as he would be a convicted person of homosexual offences. The assertion that 'the courts released offenders' ignores that harm has already occurred.' She said the reasons lacked any intelligible or informative content which could assist MAM in formulating an internal appeal and were 'characteristic of a sequence of illogical babble'. 'It is unintelligible,' she said. She cautioned that officials could not 'hide behind the hurdle to exhaust internal remedies', when they had provided obtuse and unfathomable reasons for application rejections. 'They are required to apply their minds and provide reasons which are clear, adequate and provide a meaningful basis from which an applicant can comprehend, request further reasons and decide in an informed manner as to their further rights and remedies in law.' Da Silva Salie set aside the rejection application and ordered that MAM be interviewed by a different officer within six months. She ordered the government respondents to pay the costs of the application. This article was first published by .
Telegraph
a day ago
- General
- Telegraph
Migrant can't be deported ‘because he was told to spy on Islamic State'
An asylum seeker could be allowed to remain in the UK after claiming that he would be forced to spy on Islamic State if he was returned to Georgia. The 41-year-old Muslim said he fled to Britain after security service agents in the former Soviet state tried to recruit him as an 'informant' in 2017. The asylum seeker, whose identity has been kept secret, said on two occasions special forces operatives in Georgia forcibly detained and tortured him. An expert told an immigration tribunal the attempted recruitment may have been linked to Akhmed Chatayev, the IS leader behind the 2016 Istanbul airport attack who was killed in a siege in the Georgian capital Tbilisi in 2017. The migrant said he had refused to co-operate and become a 'spy'. After entering Britain in 2019 he claimed asylum, arguing that he could not be deported to his home country because he would be 'persecuted by the state' in breach of his rights under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The Home Office refused his claim in 2023 arguing his account of events was 'not credible.' A lower tribunal judge also sided with the Government last year and found the man had 'fabricated' his story as there was 'little in the background evidence which would suggest that Georgia is a country in which such conduct as [he] alleges occurs'. But he has now won an appeal at an upper immigration tribunal which ruled that the judge was mistaken and that expert evidence suggests his account may be plausible. Judge Daniel Sills concluded that the first-tier tribunal 'misrepresented' evidence and 'failed to appreciate the role performed by the expert'. He ruled the lower tribunal's ruling should be set aside and the case should be reheard. 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 the ECHR and strengthen the public interest test.
Daily Mail
2 days ago
- General
- Daily Mail
Woolworths customer films excruciating meltdown after she is stopped from leaving the supermarket with 'free fruit' - as staff try to explain why it's not allowed
A Woolworths shopper filmed the moment she had a meltdown after she was stopped from leaving a supermarket with free fruit because it was meant for children. A staff member stopped the customer as she was leaving the store in Dandenong, south-east Melbourne, after noticing she had not paid for some bananas and apples. In a video shared to TikTok on Monday, the customer told the female worker she took a banana and apple because she was struggling and did not have food at home. 'All I wanted is this free f***ing banana that you give out to kids,' the woman yelled. 'Why would you take the free food away from me when you know it's hard? It's a f***ing free banana, what are you on about. I don't have food at home.' The Woolworths worker calmly explained the free fruit was an initiative reserved for children and as she was an adult she would have to pay for the items. The interaction escalated and the customer, who is a refugee from Russia, accused the worker of telling her to 'go back to your home country'. 'It's embarrassing that you told me to go back to my home country,' the customer said. 'She told me to go back to my country and work harder. You can't treat people like that. It's not okay.' The worker denied the accusation and claimed she was also a refugee and she worked hard too. The customer continued yelling at the worker and demanded she apologise for what she said. 'I never said that love,' the worker said. 'If I have done wrong, then I would apologise to you. You know what you're trying to do, you're trying to be a victim and you're not a victim.' The worker added she would have to call the police if the woman did not leave the store. 'I have been trying to help you but when you're crying like this and yelling and you have been abusing my team for a long time, it's been an hour,' the worker said. 'I am not leaving. Call the cops,' the customer replied. 'It's easier to call the cops than apologise for what you said. I did not steal things, it was free. I am not leaving until I get my apology.' Security intervened and asked the customer what had happened an whether she had asked the staff if she could take a free banana and apple. The customer claimed staff packaging the fruit and vegetables said it was okay for her to take a piece of fruit as long as she told service staff she was struggling. However, the Woolworths staff member claimed the customer had more than one piece of fruit in her cart and that is why she was stopped on her way out. The customer said 'so you never said what you said?' to which the staff member gave in and replied: 'Okay, sorry love about that.' 'I'm so glad to have gotten an apology from her because saying that to someone just because they wanted a free fruit from kids section is not ok,' the customer captioned the video. Social media users did not agree with the customer, with many pointing out the free fruit was clearly marked for children. 'No kid, no banana. Period!' one person commented. A second wrote: 'It's only for children to eat in store'. 'The free fruit in Coles and Woolies are for children to eat while in store. They are not for adults to help themselves for free,' another added.
Washington Post
4 days ago
- General
- Washington Post
Thousands of Ukraine's children vanished into Russia. This one made it back.
UZHHOROD, Ukraine — The boy from Mariupol still wasn't ready to walk to the bus stop alone, so just before 8 a.m., he and his grandmother set off for school together. He reached for her hand, zipping her fingers in his own, and stole a sip of her coffee. Illia Matviienko was almost 13 but still got lost easily. Three years had passed since his mother bled out in his arms after a Russian shelling, since a neighbor chipped her grave in the frozen winter of their yard, since soldiers found him alone and took him deeper into the occupied Donetsk territory, where he was put up for adoption.
