‘Mismanagement’ by the Home Office has allowed a double murderer entry into Britain, according

to Labour. A Bangladeshi national, who was convicted of murdering two people in 1990, was

granted entry into the UK on human rights grounds. The man, known as ZR, upon release in 1997,

married a British woman and had three children.

The initial application was made in 2011, but this was rejected on the grounds that his entry

‘was not in the public interest’, a key consideration when the Home Office consider the entry

applications of non-British nationals. This was appealed on the basis that, not to allow ZR entry to

join his family, was to contravene his right to ‘private and family life‘ under Article 8 of the Human

Rights Act.

This verdict could have been appealed by the Home Office, but it failed to lodge the papers on

time. This failure was without any ‘clear explanation’, according to Judge Peter King, who refused

permission to launch a late appeal.

This outcome has divided the mainstream political parties, with the Conservatives condemning the

exploitation of Labour’s Human Rights Act. Conservative MP Dominic Raab warned that ‘Article

8 claims are making Britain a safe haven for the most dangerous foreign criminals’, and blamed

Labour for passing legislation that has allowed a convicted criminal to ‘skip past UK border

controls designed to protect the public’.

However, Labour laid the blame squarely at the door of Conservative Home Secretary Theresa

May. Shadow Immigration Minister David Hanson defended the operation of the Human

Rights Act, and stated that ZR’s entry into Britain was a result of May grossly mismanaging her

department. He concluded by stating that the UK ‘deserves better’.

The Home Office swiftly assured the public that this was an isolated incident, and reaffirmed their

remit ‘to challenge appeals from convicted serious criminals looking for settlement in the UK, in

the interests of protecting our law-abiding citizens’. They emphasised that this ruling, allowing ZR

entry into Britain, was made before important provisions under the Immigration Act 2014 came

into force at the end of July.

Since the end of July, the courts must deliberate a host of new public interest considerations in

Article 8 immigration claims. It is too early to predict whether this will prevent Britain from being

a ‘safe haven’ for criminals, as Dominic Raab alleged. What is certain is that the Home Office will

lodge their appeal papers on time in the future.

Profile photo of Caislin Boyle About Caislin Boyle
Caislin has completed the BPTC at the University of Law London and is currently seeking pupillage

Print Friendly

2 Comments

  • Ameli Nixon August 12, 2014 5:13 pm

    And yet, a young woman who had been traveling backwards and forwards for her entire life, and who had gained entry based upon her mothers status as a British citizen was this week deported.

    She was exploited by the airline who was charged with returning her by charging her double to rerun to her country of origin and dumped in the middle of the night to make her own way to the place she lives.

    She arrived at the airport to be taken to the border control area, found a seat had not been reserved for her and waited for her passport to be returned to her.

    This young woman has never been in trouble with the police or anyone else and had come to the country to be with her family and to work. She had already commenced seeking work before she arrived and was to stay with her British family.

    As she was staying in the North West for the time she was permitted to stay she had to find hotel accommodation the day before the flight the border police had designated because she had to be at the airport early. Because she had to call the border office the day before she could not book her train until the last minute which of course meant a much higher cost to her.
    Upon arrival at her country of orientation she had to find accommodation at 11pm.

    Had the border police informed her that she could book a ticket on a flight for herself she would have ensured everything connected at half the cost, instead she is thousands of dollars out of pocket and traumatized. She was told that she is perfectly entitled to entry but that she was being sent home because she did not fill out the correct form, something not known to her as she had always just arrived here. The first time she had come to the UK was when she was 3 months old and considers this her second home. A young woman is now traumatized and her hard earned savings gone in needless costs and uncalled for actions by the border police. She was kept for 7 hours and no-one notified. She is not dangerous nor any trouble to anyone. Th e CAB has said that British born people are falling foul of the laws designed to prevent people entering who should not be.

  • George Gretton August 14, 2014 5:21 pm

    Caislin…. yet again! I will tolerate the scandal of our ongoing textual liaison as in the interests of Justice…

    All I pick up in this at this time is that the Opposition make a big song and dance about the Wondrous and Angry Theresa May; did you see her give the Police Conference a good piece of her mind, with just fury? NO BOOS THERE! No bottle to issue them….

    MANY people are terrified of said Mrs May, and especially, if you are Labour, and perhaps Lib Dem, in respect of the possibility that she will be the Next Leader of the Conservative Party; an awesome thought; thus the fuss….

    Heaven utterly forbid that the Buffoon and Baboon Extraordinaire Boris should be allowed to bring that job into Dreadful and Dangerous Dire Disrepute….

    Yours, as moderate and calm as ever,

    George “The Sweetie-Pie” Gretton

Add Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Skip to toolbar