Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Mass changes to UK immigration requirements


Recommended Posts

 

Musta Jamal managed to stay because of danger in Somalia - he later fled there to escape justice.  That sounds fraudulent to me.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-423813/The-killer-asylum-seekers.html

 

Of course if he had been law abiding here - this would never have come out.

 

Don't know how to edit but meant to also note that Mustafa Jamal was not an Asylum Seeker as claimed by the DM. It's certainly a trigger term for their readers though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

It would have been his parents making the claim and given one of them was a warlord I'd say their claim to be fleeing persecution held up.

 

I would say that anyone who is a warlord is not fleeing persecution but the consequences of their actions.  Would you give a Mafioso asylum?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I would say that anyone who is a warlord is not fleeing persecution but the consequences of their actions.  Would you give a Mafioso asylum?  

Becoming a warlord usually happens after the breakdown of a state where people do what they have to do to survive.

Anyway, I have no idea if the dad originally came with his son. All I know is that he came with family and hasn't made a fraudulent claim for asylum.

Your question is rightly a moral one but once you introduce moral judgement or personal politics into an asylum claim you defeat the purpose of asylum. 

A Jewish person in Nazi Germany may have broken a law specifically aimed at Jews or just been convicted without just cause so are you saying we should make a judgement based on that person being a 'criminal'? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Your question is rightly a moral one but once you introduce moral judgement or personal politics into an asylum claim you defeat the purpose of asylum. 

A Jewish person in Nazi Germany may have broken a law specifically aimed at Jews or just been convicted without just cause so are you saying we should make a judgement based on that person being a 'criminal'? 

Moral judgement and personal politics are precisely why we'd reject the idea that that person is a criminal, because if you ignore those then all you're left with is, yes, he has broken a law.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Becoming a warlord usually happens after the breakdown of a state where people do what they have to do to survive.

Anyway, I have no idea if the dad originally came with his son. All I know is that he came with family and hasn't made a fraudulent claim for asylum.

Your question is rightly a moral one but once you introduce moral judgement or personal politics into an asylum claim you defeat the purpose of asylum. 

A Jewish person in Nazi Germany may have broken a law specifically aimed at Jews or just been convicted without just cause so are you saying we should make a judgement based on that person being a 'criminal'? 

The purpose of asylum is not to enable criminals to escape the consequences of their actions. Ronnie Biggs had a genuine fear of persecution in the UK

On the topic of fraudulent claims here is a case of an 18 year old who wasn't 18 - no news about whether he was genuine but definetly there was some fraud

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/first-picture-30-year-old-13631270

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I would say that anyone who is a warlord is not fleeing persecution but the consequences of their actions.  Would you give a Mafioso asylum?  

After further reading it appears his father might still be in Somalia which would make the original family claim to Asylum in the UK non fraudulent as clearly they would be in fear of persecution.

Interestingly the British government used militiamen from a failed state to capture him and bring him back to the UK so clearly there is no moral compunction in their actions.

Also interesting is the fact that Somalia was a former colonial state.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Moral judgement and personal politics are precisely why we'd reject the idea that that person is a criminal, because if you ignore those then all you're left with is, yes, he has broken a law.

Exactly.

My point is that we shouldn't refuse an asylum claim based on whether the person could be deemed to have brought it on themselves as the poster I was replying to suggested.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see why the police don't bother trying to get people who lied to get asylum.

Two people claimed to be from Kosovo weren't - but still didn't get deported

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/27/two-albanians-not-deported-despite-lying-get-citizenship/"

https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/dc-00035-2018

 

For some bizarre reason the BBC didn't report the above case.

 

This man claimed to be from Syria but was Egyptian and killed someone (true he didn't get asylum but it does show the problem of people lying to get it)

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/24/illegal-immigrant-murdered-man-hyde-park-home-office-repeatedly/

Edited by iamnumerate
Link to post
Share on other sites
 

The purpose of asylum is not to enable criminals to escape the consequences of their actions. Ronnie Biggs had a genuine fear of persecution in the UK

On the topic of fraudulent claims here is a case of an 18 year old who wasn't 18 - no news about whether he was genuine but definetly there was some fraud

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/first-picture-30-year-old-13631270

 

 

What persecution would Ronnie Biggs have faced from the state? He was fearful of prosecution, not persecution.

Again though you appear to be confusing an asylum application with someone with refugee status.

After reading around the subject his man faced deportation.

What I asked was for an example of someone who had been granted refugee status that was subsequently found to have been from a fraudulent application for asylum. I asked for this because you claimed people granted refugee status then went on holiday back to the country they claimed persecution from.

So far you have given the case of a 12 year old who didn't go on holiday anywhere and a man posing as a child at school who is now facing deportation or been deported.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

The purpose of asylum is not to enable criminals to escape the consequences of their actions. Ronnie Biggs had a genuine fear of persecution in the UK

He had a genuine fear of prosecution. That prosecution was not persecution.

edit - I see the post right above this one has already said just that.

Edited by Riedquat
Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Exactly.

My point is that we shouldn't refuse an asylum claim based on whether the person could be deemed to have brought it on themselves as the poster I was replying to suggested.

That's what we are doing - we just judge that based on our standards instead of the ones from where they've come from. It works both ways - the person who broke a law we find unacceptable gets asylum, the one who set those laws but flees when he gets thrown out doesn't.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I can see why the police don't bother trying to get people who lied to get asylum.

Two people claimed to be from Kosovo weren't - but still didn't get deported

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/27/two-albanians-not-deported-despite-lying-get-citizenship/"

https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/dc-00035-2018

 

For some bizarre reason the BBC didn't report the above case.

 

This man claimed to be from Syria but was Egyptian and killed someone (true he didn't get asylum but it does show the problem of people lying to get it)

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/24/illegal-immigrant-murdered-man-hyde-park-home-office-repeatedly/

Stories are hidden behind a paywall.

If neither of these cases are of someone who is a refugee who it was subsequently found out came from a fraudulent asylum claim then this game is becoming pointless.

You claimed refugees were going on holiday to the country they fled but so far haven't given a single example.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

What persecution would Ronnie Biggs have faced from the state? He was fearful of prosecution, not persecution.

Again though you appear to be confusing an asylum application with someone with refugee status.

After reading around the subject his man faced deportation.

What I asked was for an example of someone who had been granted refugee status that was subsequently found to have been from a fraudulent application for asylum. I asked for this because you claimed people granted refugee status then went on holiday back to the country they claimed persecution from.

So far you have given the case of a 12 year old who didn't go on holiday anywhere and a man posing as a child at school who is now facing deportation or been deported.

 

I have now given you two cases of people who got asylum despite not even being from the country they claimed to be fleeing!  

I think this proves that there is a problem in the system.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

That's what we are doing - we just judge that based on our standards instead of the ones from where they've come from. It works both ways - the person who broke a law we find unacceptable gets asylum, the one who set those laws but flees when he gets thrown out doesn't.

I would have to look in more depth at how asylum claims are judged but you may be right.

I was trying to make a specific point relating to the example given by the poster I was replying to.

Either way, an asylum claim will always be investigated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I have now given you two cases of people who got asylum despite not even being from the country they claimed to be fleeing!  

I think this proves that there is a problem in the system.

Eh?

If you are referring to your last two links they are behind a paywall which I'm not prepared to sign up to. Can you cut and paste or find some way of posting accessible evidence?

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Stories are hidden behind a paywall.

If neither of these cases are of someone who is a refugee who it was subsequently found out came from a fraudulent asylum claim then this game is becoming pointless.

 

This is not behind a paywall.  I don't know why you think it is.

https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/dc-00035-2018

 

I think anyone didn't come from Kosovo is not a genuine Kosovan refugee, don't you?  I think this proves that people can get asylum without any fear and depressingly not get deported if then attacking people.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I have now given you two cases of people who got asylum despite not even being from the country they claimed to be fleeing!  

I think this proves that there is a problem in the system.

Right, got access to the second story which is about an illegal immigrant which clearly is not someone who got asylum.

You keep giving me examples that are not people with refugee status who have subsequently been found to have made a fraudulent asylum claim. You may as well list your top 10 80's pop songs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

Right, got access to the second story which is about an illegal immigrant which clearly is not someone who got asylum.

You keep giving me examples that are not people with refugee status who have subsequently been found to have made a fraudulent asylum claim. You may as well list your top 10 80's pop songs.

As I said before

 

This is not behind a paywall.  I don't know why you think it is.

https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/dc-00035-2018

 

I think anyone didn't come from Kosovo is not a genuine Kosovan refugee, don't you?  I think this proves that people can get asylum without any fear and depressingly not get deported if then attacking people.

 

The court said "It is common ground between the parties that the appellant obtained his British citizenship by fraud. He was issued with a British passport in 2004."

 

The good news is that eventually more than 9 years after the process started this bogus asylum seeker lost his British citizenship

https://oliverandhasani.co.uk/upper-tribunal-dismisses-appeal-in-hysaj-v-secretary-of-state-for-the-home-department-dc-00035-2018/

Never reported by the BBC website AFAIK

I can see why more cases are not investigated if someone who was from a different country than he claimed could spend so long fighting it in court. 

Edited by iamnumerate
Link to post
Share on other sites
 

This is not behind a paywall.  I don't know why you think it is.

https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/dc-00035-2018

 

I think anyone didn't come from Kosovo is not a genuine Kosovan refugee, don't you?  I think this proves that people can get asylum without any fear and depressingly not get deported if then attacking people.

You are correct, my apologies, I thought it was an extension of the telegraph link.

That's some mammoth read.

The decision appears to be that the denial of British Citizenship by the first judge was upheld. What do you think it says?

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

You are correct, my apologies, I thought it was an extension of the telegraph link.

That's some mammoth read.

The decision appears to be that the denial of British Citizenship by the first judge was upheld. What do you think it says?

I think so and you are right it is confusing and that your view is correct.

It does say a lot about the immigration system that someone can get asylum despite from not coming from country x.

It also says a lot about the BBC that they didn't report it.  It means that only Telegraph readers have heard about it which is quite sad.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

As I said before

 

This is not behind a paywall.  I don't know why you think it is.

https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/dc-00035-2018

 

I think anyone didn't come from Kosovo is not a genuine Kosovan refugee, don't you?  I think this proves that people can get asylum without any fear and depressingly not get deported if then attacking people.

 

The court said "It is common ground between the parties that the appellant obtained his British citizenship by fraud. He was issued with a British passport in 2004."

 

The good news is that eventually more than 9 years after the process started this bogus asylum seeker lost his British citizenship

https://oliverandhasani.co.uk/upper-tribunal-dismisses-appeal-in-hysaj-v-secretary-of-state-for-the-home-department-dc-00035-2018/

Never reported by the BBC website AFAIK

This is where terms are important.

You cannot be a bogus asylum seeker because it is not illegal to seek asylum nor is it illegal to apply for asylum even if your case subsequently falls down be it for lying on your application or other reasons. 

I thought you said the BBC didn't report on the case?

 

Anyway, thank you, you have finally given an example I asked for. One that happened over 20 years ago although he didn't go back for another 9 years.

Interestingly Albania is on the top 5 countries where UK asylum claims come from so there is a chance 20 years ago his circumstances did meet the criteria but he decided to enhance his case by lying about where he came from to increase his chances of being granted refugee status. It's not quite the case that he trotted off on holiday back to whence he came within a matter of days.

What this discussion has highlighted is that fraudulent claims may not necessarily mean there isn't an asylum case to be made. Often the term bogus is used to mean people are just here for a jolly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

I think so and you are right it is confusing and that your view is correct.

It does say a lot about the immigration system that someone can get asylum despite from not coming from country x.

It also says a lot about the BBC that they didn't report it.  It means that only Telegraph readers have heard about it which is quite sad.

That is only a commentary on one case over 20 years ago though. Two decades is a long time.

I don't see why one case chosen by the Telegraph should mean the BBC should have come across it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
 

As I said before

 

This is not behind a paywall.  I don't know why you think it is.

https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/dc-00035-2018

 

I think anyone didn't come from Kosovo is not a genuine Kosovan refugee, don't you?  I think this proves that people can get asylum without any fear and depressingly not get deported if then attacking people.

 

The court said "It is common ground between the parties that the appellant obtained his British citizenship by fraud. He was issued with a British passport in 2004."

 

The good news is that eventually more than 9 years after the process started this bogus asylum seeker lost his British citizenship

https://oliverandhasani.co.uk/upper-tribunal-dismisses-appeal-in-hysaj-v-secretary-of-state-for-the-home-department-dc-00035-2018/

Never reported by the BBC website AFAIK

I can see why more cases are not investigated if someone who was from a different country than he claimed could spend so long fighting it in court. 

How do you edit?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.