Albanian crime boss allowed to stay in UK after claiming deportation breaches his human rights
by Traditional_Wish_342
Albanian crime boss allowed to stay in UK after claiming deportation breaches his human rights
by Traditional_Wish_342
22 comments
Yet, we keep innocent families apart on a financial requirement, totally disregarding individual circumstances and their human rights? A criminal has corroded their liberties and rights, in my opinion, insofar as our law is fair/reasonable. It is.
Fuck’s sake. This is a textbook scam. Criminal finds someone daft enough to get them into the country, stays with them long enough to get citizenship, then cuts it off. All the while he’s doing criminal shit.
> Kolicaj appealed, claiming he had not been given a chance to challenge his risk of reoffending. A probation report claimed there was a “low” risk.
Heavy involvement in organised crime. Low risk of reoffending. Who comes up with this shit?
Ffs when are we going to just deport these people. He is involved with organised crime. Just kick him out.
And here we have the start of the greasy slope that culminates in us abandoning the ECHR. Hopefully those cunts will be out in time for this not to happen. More and more of these stories will appear in the Mail and the Telegraph as we get closer to an election.
So these odd immigration cases… are they going to be the new “mom on benefits with 200 children living in £50m pound mansion” articles?
It’s because our government are connected to the same organised crime groups. I say deport him, and remove the torie government. Death would be a kindness for these mfers
He is in the right country for criminals. Nothing to see here. Next….
This should be dealt with by a properly funded justice system not tried on the pages of the same right wing press that gave you Brexit and a huge increase in legal and illegal immigration.
So the UK went in and looked at the human rights that they might breach or did they just say OK because he said so?
Won’t be surprised if we start seeing more and more of this kind of thing being drummed up the media as the Tories gear up to try and strip away all of our human rights.
1. He’s a British Citizen. So it is entirely normal that he has rights.
2. Any decision taken by the government has to consider the human rights of anyone affected. That doesn’t mean they can’t take the decision. The problem here appears to be the home office has just decided to disregard them, rather than provide an explanation how their action is a proportionate way to achieve one of the aims allowed under Article 8 of the ECHR.
If the Home Office redoes it’s homework properly, then they may well be able to deport him. However, his children are British Citizens, he is a British Citizen, and the day that can be disregarded by executive fiat without following the proper process is a dangerous one for the rule of law and for civil liberties generally.
​
(For those interested, the decision is here – [https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/2023-ukut-00294](https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/2023-ukut-00294) )
Cases like this that cause a conflict between due process which protects us – and common decency which would see us rid ourself of such individuals.
>08. Any criminal proceedings entail certain consequences for the private life of an individual who has committed a crime. These are compatible with Article 8 of the Convention provided that they do not exceed the normal and inevitable consequences of such a situation (Jankauskas v. Lithuania (no. 2), § 76). Article 8 cannot be relied on in order to complain about a loss of reputation which is the foreseeable consequence of one’s own actions, such as, for example, the commission of a criminal offence (Sidabras and Džiautas v. Lithuania, § 49 and contrast Pişkin v. Turkey, §§ 180-183). This principle is valid not only for criminal offences but also for other misconduct entailing a measure of legal responsibility with foreseeable negative effects on “private life” (Denisov v. Ukraine[GC], § 98 with further references therein).
Doesn’t being convicted of 8 years smuggling, entail those certain consequences and justify deportation? I’m sure there are circumstances allowed for where Article 8 can be invalidated due to a conviction.
Do other countries take that view when trying to deport criminals or is it just us? Albania is listed as a safe country isn’t it? Given his wife is an Albanian national as well, then would’ve assumed she’d be free to join him too if she didn’t want to be deprived of her life with him.
I don’t see this as an issue with the European Convention on Human Rights, but more a lenient view of it when it comes to the consequences of criminals.
It doesn’t say in the article that this guy was originally an asylum seeker or just in the UK for whatever reason, he got his citizenship via marriage to a British woman. Either way he needs to be gone.
And a majority of Sun “Readers” think it’s a left wing paper.
Must be an election coming, right wing press are trying to make out that immigration is the only issue this country faces, worst thing is most of the population are thick enough to fall for it
Albanians are coming over en mass (criminals smuggled over by underground gangsters), getting a British/settled girl pregnant within months of illegally arriving, then chucking her when they get a kid and a visa. It is legal exploitation of women but your do-gooders will defend it because they are a minority.
Two brothers from Eastern Europe who have been residing in the City Centre where I work, have just been granted indefinite leave to remain this month. Both are considered a risk to women for a number of incidents and arrests they have been involved in. This Country can be an absolute joke.
“Home Office failed to take sufficient account of his human rights and other claims in their decision.”
I bet that the Torygraph undermined the “other claims “ and highlighted “human rights”. Judges are not idiots.
If that is true, the Torygraph should be closed.
Couple problems here – he wasn’t allowed to stay because of this claim, he was allowed to stay because of a bunch of claims made. Interesting that the telegraph never actually says what those claims are:
*immigration judges granted his appeal against the removal of his citizenship and deportation on the grounds that the Home Office failed to take sufficient account of his human rights and other claims in their decision.*
The handwaving of “other claims” makes me wonder what they were.
*He also claimed errors of law in the decision and a breach of his right to a family life under article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).*
*The judges, however, said these issues raised by Kolicaj had not “played any part in the [Home Office’s] decision making process”*
*“Rather, the [Home Office] has progressed directly from [their] assessment of the seriousness of the offending to a conclusion that the appellant should be deprived of his citizenship without appreciating that [they] had a discretion to exercise based on all the circumstances of the case,” the judges ruled.*
These immigration judges are UK judges. This means it’s all related to UK law.
they scammed the entire world into making a new country, why is this a surprise?
I’m confused. What human rights are going to be taken if he’s returned to Albania?
Don’t get me wrong, it’s a fucked up country after decades of dictatorship, but it’s not so fucked up as to be a risk to anyone’s human rights.