A Zimbabwean man who was set to be deported from Northern Ireland with his three children has won his case after the High Court granted a ...
A Zimbabwean man who was set to be deported from Northern
Ireland with his three children has won his case after the High Court granted a judicial review.
The Zimbabwean man who cannot be identified said he fled Zimbabwe
following the alleged politically-motivated killing of his father.
The 35-year-old says he fears persecution if returned
because of his family's links to the country's opposition party, the Movement
for Demoratic Change (MDC).
He was granted a judicial review over claims the Home
Office unlawfully refused to re-examine his failed asylum application after
submitting further information about him and his three children.
Quashing the decision, Mr Justice McCloskey said:
"This will trigger a public law obligation to make a fresh decision."
The man, referred to as JM4, stated that arrived in Belfast
with his family in December 2013 after travelling from South Africa to Dublin
on a false passport.
He sought asylum on the basis of connections to the MDC. JM4
claimed his father was shot dead by state agents because of his membership of
the party, and that he was told his own life was also at risk immediately
before he fled Zimbabwe.
In 2014 his asylum claim was turned down. Officials decided
it was tenuous to claim any anti-regime political opinion from his father's
actions could also be attributed to him.
Further documents were submitted in a bid to have the
application reconsidered due to JM4's fears of persecution on return to
Zimbabwe. These were: an MDC letter, an MDC membership card, a police report
and a copy death certificate.
But in October 2018 the authorities expressed scepticism
about their authenticity. Finding no exceptional circumstances to warrant leave
to remain in the UK, it was also decided that JM4's three children were young
enough to adapt back to life in Zimbabwe.
He launched a judicial review challenge, claiming a failure
to apply the correct legal test and breaches of his human rights.
Identifying a breach of the Home Office's duties, Mr
Justice McCloskey also held: "The evidence previously considered and the
best interests assessment previously made were both of considerable vintage,
over four years old, at the time of the impugned decision.
"Four years is a long period in the life of every
child." He confirmed: "The most suitable remedy is an order
quashing the impugned decision of the Secretary of State."
COMMENTS