Somalian immigrant convicted of rape claims it is his HUMAN RIGHT to stay in UK
HOME Secretary Theresa May has won the latest round of a human rights fight with a Somalian immigrant she wants to deport because he was convicted of rape.
PUBLISHED: 06:00, Sat, May 7, 2016
Theresa May has won the latest round of a human rights fight with a Somalian immigrant, not pictured.
Abdulkadir Ahmed Said, 32, said he would probably end up in a makeshift refugee camp and find himself destitute if forced to return to Somalia.
He said if that happened his right to protection from “inhuman or degrading treatment” – enshrined in Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights – would be violated.
A specialist immigration judge had ruled in Said’s favour but three Court of Appeal judges have overturned that decision and backed Mrs May.
They ruled on Friday that deportation would not breach Said’s human rights after analysing the case at a hearing in London in April.
One appeal judge, Lord Justice Burnett, outlined the background to the case in a written ruling.
Abdulkadir Ahmed Said said he would probably end up in a makeshift refugee camp.
Said had lived in the UK for around 20 years and had been given indefinite leave to remain in 2003, said the judge.
In 2009, he had been convicted of two counts of rape – following a hearing at Blackfriars Crown Court – and given a five-year jail term.
Lord Justice Burnett said deportation proceedings had been launched to coincide with Said’s release from prison.
Said had been convicted of two counts of rape.
Said had then challenged Mrs May’s decision to deport and launched a human rights fight.
An immigration judge had ruled in Said’s favour nearly two years ago – and Mrs May had appealed against that decision.
Lord Justice Burnett said Said might have difficulty integrating back into Somalian life.
Deportation proceedings have been launched to coincide with Said’s release from prison.
But he said there was “no suggestion” that Said would be “precluded from working”.
And he said deportation would not breach Article 3 of the convention.
The two other appeal judges who analysed the case – Lord Justice Christopher Clarke and Lady Justice Sharp – agreed.