Failed asylum seeker can stay in UK because she joined terror group

19 comments

1. This link has been shared 1 time.

   First Seen [Here](https://redd.it/1io3478) on 2025-02-12.

   —

   **Scope:** Reddit | **Check Title:** False | **Max Age:** None | **Searched Links:** 0 | **Search Time:** 0.00668s

2. I admit I’m a simple man. But at this point (see also chicken nuggets), I’m just lost.

3. Good, she’s a human being and should be treated as such

4. I used to read the actual rulings these headlines were based on and find that the ruling said nothing of the kind and just mentioned the thing in the headline as a fact that had been stated at trial.

   Now I just see “Telegraph”, see that it’s rage bait and instantly assume that’s not what happened.

5. In this case she joined a terrorist organisation 6 years after starting her fight to stay here. The timelines don’t seem to be in dispute. That is a clear attempt to deceive/manipulate the system and I don’t think she should have been allowed to stay.

   That said the bigger issue for me is that she had 8 previous rulings against her. You should get to make a claim and have an appeal right. Not an endless process of appeal after appeal until one finally sticks.

6. Just lubing up the UK for the inevitable arrival of Farage as PM at this point.

7. Usual right wing press spinning…. are all laws perfect – no, does that mean we should just scrap the wider protections of the echr (or judges) – no.

   (Also, the UK does not recognise this group as a terrorist org. I make no comment on whether they are or not, but in uk law they are not – so the headline is very misleading).

8. I bet the story and the headline are slightly different

9. TLDR: She was refused asylum in the UK. Joined a terrorist group that is banned in Nigeria but not in the UK. Judge ruled that if deported, she would face persecution for her political beliefs implied by membership of the group, which would violate her human rights

10. Another decision overturned by an unelected Upper Tribunal judge, good to see our money being used on 9 appeals of a Nigerian asylum seeker.

11. And people wonder why there is a vocal minority that want us out the echr. Stuff like this is indefensible

12. How the fuck does that make any sense?

13. So she committed a crime in her own country, and we’re taking her in to protect her from the consequences.

    Reassuring to know we’re the top destination for African criminals.

14. Some are dismissing this story because it’s from the Telegraph. Other papers including the Times have it. Seems pretty accurate to me, having read the tribunal record: 

    [https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/ui-2024-000671](https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/ui-2024-000671)

    Here is the timeline, taken from that record:

    * 2011 arrived
    * 2013 refused leave to remain
    * 2015 raised humans rights claim – refused
    * 2016 further appeal refused
    * 2017 further appear refused
    * 2017 claimed asylum as was now a supporter of IPOB
    * 2018 claim refused
    * 2019 submitted another, refused
    * 2020 another, refused
    * 2023 back with the IPOB claim

    Admits not meeting the UK IPOB member until 2016 – several years AFTER her entry to the UK

    Judge states “I note that the appellant’s activities are not motivated by a genuinely held political belief” but grants her case because she would be in danger either way as a member of IPOB

    So could have been returned to Nigeria, with no danger to her person back in 2011/2013 but our stupid system allowed appeal after appear after appeal until after 6 years she went to a demo in London, met an IPOB member and supposedly put herself in potential danger from the Nigerian state.

    So all you need to do, to game our idiotic system is to put yourself in theoretical danger and you don’t need to bother doing it before you arrive, you can take your time coming up with a good one whilst you get a few years of appeals and then go to a few demos, change your religion or whatever it takes.

    We paid for 14 years of appeals and probably her legal representation throughout.

15. At this point, why not. It’s clown world.

16. I just read up on IPOB and it seems to be an independence movement that is battling the corruption of government. But I suppose that doesn’t fit the Torygraph editorial agenda.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indigenous_People_of_Biafra?wprov=sfti1#

17. She joined the group in 2016. At the time of joining, it was not considered a terrorist organisation. In 2017, the Nigerian government declared it as a TO.

    She did not join the group as some ploy to win her asylum case.

18. Utter click bait misleading story. Read the history of Biafra. Ukrainians are called Nazis by Russia. Let’s therefore be angry at Ukrainians being given asylum here.

19. Either the law is very badly designed, or we have an anti-UK cadre of extremist left wing pro open borders judges in the upper tribunal. I am becoming very suspicious of the judiciary in some parts. Selection committees effectively allow activists to only hire and promote activists. You can have an activist takeover of the judiciary with little oversight. Same for the civil service. I’m deeply concerned about what I see from the immigration tribunal. If I were in charge I may be tempted to clean house. That said, it’s likely the root issue is the ECHR.

Comments are closed.