After having her asylum request denied eight times in Britain, a migrant from Nigeria resorted to joining a terror group to bolster her case and has now been granted permission to remain in the country.
The woman, aged 49, deliberately got involved with the Indigenous People of Biafra with the intention of strengthening her asylum claim, according to a judge’s ruling.
Originally arriving in the UK in 2011, the migrant became affiliated with IPOB in 2017. This group, considered a separatist organization by Nigeria and accused of violent activities, is not classified as a terrorist entity in the UK.
Upper tribunal judge Gemma Loughran said that because the woman was part of the group, she has a ‘well-founded fear of persecution’ in her home country.
Shadow home secretary Chris Philip slammed the decision to grant asylum as a ‘comically ludicrous’ interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights.
It is the latest in a series of tribunal rulings allowing deportations to be paused, or asylum to be granted under human rights laws.
The migrant said she was worried about being arrested at the airport and ‘disappeared’ if she returned to her country, The Telegraph reported.
A lower tribunal judge originally rejected this claim due to a lack of evidence about her activities within the group.
A migrant whose claim for asylum in Britain was rejected eight times has finally been granted the right to stay after deliberately joining a terror group to boost her claim. File photo
The migrant came to the UK in 2011 and joined IPOB in 2017. Pictured: The Border Force checking passports at Gatwick Airport in London
Kemi Badenoch led a furious backlash over a ‘crazy’ court ruling that a family of Gaza refugees must be allowed into the UK despite applying through a scheme for Ukrainians
Judge Iain Burnett ruled that the woman joined IPOB purely ‘in order to create a claim for asylum’.
But the upper tribunal judge overturned the decision, saying it was likely the woman would be identified as an activist upon her return.
She ruled: ‘It is clear from the country background evidence that the security services act arbitrarily and arrest, harm and detain those it believes may be involved with IPOB without conducting an assessment of the extent of their involvement or their motivation.
‘The appeal is allowed on the basis that [the Nigerian woman] has a well-founded fear of persecution on account of her imputed political opinion arising from her involvement with IPOB in the UK.’
It comes amid a backlash to a ‘crazy’ court ruling that a family of Gaza refugees must be allowed into the UK despite applying through a scheme for Ukrainians.
Critics have warned the decision by the immigration tribunal could open the floodgates to anyone in a conflict zone applying for asylum.
Keir Starmer responded that he agreed the ruling was ‘wrong’ and the Government was looking at changing the law.
The mother, father and four children aged between seven and 18 years old had applied to the Ukraine Family Scheme asking to join their brother already living in the UK – whom they had not seen in person for 17 years.
The case was initially rejected by the Home Office. But immigration judges have now overturned that, on the basis that human rights have been breached.
Ms Badenoch continued her attack after PMQs, branding Sir Keir a ‘lawyer not a leader’
They concluded that the applicants’ right to a family life was being affected, even though they would not have counted as a ‘unit’ before the latest flare-up of conflict in Gaza.
At PMQs, the Tory leader demanded to know whether the Government was planning to appeal. Ms Badenoch said the UK needed to put ‘our interests’ above the ‘ECHR’.
It follows a ruling that an Albanian criminal is allowed the stay in Britain in part because his son has ‘distaste’ for foreign chicken nuggets.
An immigration tribunal ruled it would be ‘unduly harsh’ for the 10-year-old boy to be forced to move back with his father due to his sensory issues with different types of food.
The judge allowed the father’s appeal against deportation as a breach of his right to a family life as a result.
Albanian Klevis Disha, 39, came to the UK illegally in February 2001 when he was a 15-year-old unaccompanied child.
He entered under a false name and falsely claimed to have been born in the former Yugoslavia. His asylum claim was rejected, but he secured UK citizenship in 2007 after being granted exceptional leave to remain, and then indefinite leave.
In 2017, he was imprisoned for two years after being caught with £250,000 cash.
Then Home Secretary Priti Patel ordered he should be deported to Albania and stripped of his UK citizenship, but Disha appealed and was backed by a judge at an immigration tribunal.
The judge ruled that deportation would be unfair to his son – known only as C – for him to remain in the UK and be separated from his father, or to be forced to go with him to Albania.
C was said to have ‘sensory difficulties’ with some clothing, such as socks, and certain types of food which meant he would ‘refuse to do anything’.
Then Home Secretary Priti Patel ordered he should be deported to Albania and stripped of his UK citizenship, but Disha appealed and was backed by a judge at an immigration tribunal
The child’s ‘additional’ needs were supported only by evidence from a trainee educational psychologist, a neighbour and a family friend.
There was no formal diagnosis of special educational needs, The Telegraph reported.
But he did have an educational plan to deal with his ’emotional regulation, independence; reading and writing.’
Another judge in the upper tribunal disagreed with the assessment that the child’s needs couldn’t be met if he was returned to Albania.
The judge said the only example of why the boy could not go was that he ‘will not eat the type of chicken nuggets that are available abroad’.
‘We are not persuaded that the addition of this sole example approaches anywhere near the level of harshness for a reasonable judge to find it to be ‘unduly’ so,’ he said.
The case will be reheard by a different judge to decide whether the consequences of deportation would be unduly harsh on the 10-year-old boy. The case is ongoing.
A Home Office spokesman said: ‘Foreign nationals who commit heinous crimes should be in no doubt that we will do everything to make sure they are not free on Britain’s streets, including removal from the UK at the earliest possible opportunity.
‘Since the election, we’ve removed 2,580 foreign criminals, a 23 per cent increase on the same period 12 months prior.’
Stock image of a child eating chicken nuggets
In another case, a migrant who raped a sleeping woman won a bid to stay in the UK after arguing his life would be in danger if he was deported to Jamaica because he is ‘bisexual’.
The 41-year-old claimed he didn’t know that having sex with a woman who is sleeping was wrong.
The man, who was granted anonymity for his own protection, was sentenced to seven years in jail in 2018 for the rape at a party.
He was released in June 2021 and given a deportation order, with The Home Office branding him a ‘danger to the community’.
But the migrant challenged this because he had been subject to violence in his home country due to his sexuality and that was why he moved to the UK in 2018.
He told the tribunal he was attacked with a ‘metal bar, machete and dogs’.
The tribunal was also told that an older man he was dating was killed for being gay.
An expert said the migrant would be a ‘target’ if he returned due to his sexuality – but The Home Office said there was only evidence of him dating women in the UK.
