Beroghani v S of S for the Home Department
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judgment Date | 23 March 2017 |
| Docket Number | No 4 |
| Date | 23 March 2017 |
| Court | Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) |
Extra Division
Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber)
A v Secretary of State for the Home Department sub nom A v BBC (Scotland); A v British Broadcasting Corporation[2014] UKSC 25; 2014 SC (UKSC) 151; 2014 SLT 613; 2014 SCLR 593; [2015] AC 588; [2014] 2 WLR 1243; [2014] 2 All ER 1037; [2014] EMLR 25; 37 BHRC 664 BBC, Petrs 2002 JC 27
Guardian News and Media Ltd and ors (Re) [2010] UKSC 1; [2010] 2 AC 697; [2010] 2 WLR 325; [2010] 2 All ER 799; [2010] EMLR 15; [2010] HRLR 14; [2010] UKHRR 181
HJ (Iran) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] UKSC 31; [2011] 1 AC 596; [2010] 3 WLR 386; [2010] Imm AR 729
SB (Risk on return – Illegal exit) (Iran CG) [2009] UKAIT 00053
Administration of justice — Principle of open justice — Exceptions to principle of open justice — Convention rights — Freedom of expression — Foreign national convicted of sexual offences in Scotland and made subject to order for deportation — Anonymity order sought in relation to reporting of proceedings against deportation order — Whether real risk to applicant's life and safety on return to country of origin if his identity were published — Whether interference with freedom of expression of media necessary — Contempt of Court Act 1981 (cap 49), sec 11 — European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Arts 2, 3, 10
Human rights — Freedom of expression — Foreign national convicted of sexual offences in Scotland and made subject to order for deportation — Anonymity order sought in relation to reporting of proceedings against deportation order — Whether real risk to applicant's life and safety on return to country of origin if his identity were published — Whether interference with freedom of expression of media necessary — Contempt of Court Act 1981 (cap 49), sec 11 — European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Arts 2, 3, 10
Amir Mehdi Beroghani made an application in the Inner House of the Court of Session for an anonymity order in terms of sec 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, preventing publication of his name, in connection with ongoing proceedings appealing against an order made for his deportation by the Secretary of State for the Home Department. On 19 January 2017, the Lord Ordinary (Bracadale) made an order ad interim and continued consideration to a hearing, on 10 February 2017, on the question of whether to make an order.
Section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 (cap 49) (‘the 1981 Act’) provides, “In any case where a court (having power to do so) allows a name or other matter to be withheld from the public in proceedings before the court, the court may give such directions prohibiting the publication of that name or matter in connection with the proceedings as appear to the court to be necessary for the purpose for which it was so withheld.”
The applicant was a foreign national who had been convicted in Scotland of sexual offences involving children. The respondent commenced deportation proceedings against the applicant and, after the applicant's appeal against that decision was refused by the First-tier Tribunal and Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber), the applicant sought leave to appeal from the Court of Session. In the course of the substantive hearing of that application, the applicant sought an anonymity order in terms of sec 11 of the 1981 Act, preventing publication of his name in any reporting of the proceedings concerning the appeal against the order for his deportation. An interim order was pronounced. The applicant was refused leave to appeal. Determination of whether to grant a final order was continued to another hearing, at which the British Broadcasting Corporation (‘BBC’) appeared.
The applicant claimed that there was a real risk that further reporting of these proceedings would come to the attention of the authorities in his country of origin, and that his being homosexual, together with the fact of his previous convictions, were matters which would render him liable to persecution if deported and that, in those circumstances, the risks to the applicant of his being identified in any reporting of the matter outweighed the rights of the BBC to freedom of expression in terms of Art 10 of the Convention.
The BBC submitted that any restriction on open justice required to be based on a real risk of persecution being convincingly demonstrated and that the applicant had failed to demonstrate any such risk, either in consequence of his claim to be homosexual or of his previous convictions, and that, in any event, material identifying the applicant already existed on the internet and could be readily discovered by a search.
Held that: (1) the evidence of the...
To continue reading
Request your trial