Divisional Courts
| DOI | 10.1177/002201837704100104 |
| Published date | 01 January 1977 |
| Date | 01 January 1977 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Divisional Courts
Comments
on
Cases
ILLEGALLY
DETAINED
R. v.
Governor
if
Risley Remand
Centre
ex.
p.
Hassan
Wajid
Hassan
(1976,
1W.L.R. 971) arrived at
Heathrow
from
Karachi
on the 7th April 1975. According to his
account
of
what
happened,
he passed through
Immigration
and
was given leave to
remain
in
England
for six months.
On
the 26th
February
1976 he was arrested by the
Manchester
Police,
and
taken to
Manchester
Airport
where he was interviewed by
the
Immigration
Authorities.
It
was there suggested
that
he
had
never
passed through
Immigration
on his arrival in April 1975,
and
was
therefore an illegal
immigrant.
As a result of the view formed by the
Immigration
Authorities an
order
was
made
for his detention in Risley
Remand
Centre.
On
the 23rd
March
1976 his application for a writ of
Habeas
Corpus
was
heard
by the Divisional
Court.
The
point
at
issue between the
Crown
and
the
Applicant
was
whether
he was in fact an illegal
immigrant,
and
this point could only
be decided when
and
ifit
was known
whether
or not the
Applicant
had
in fact passed
through
Immigration
when he entered the country in
April 1975.
Paragraph
9, Schedule 2
of
the
Immigration
Act 1971 au thorises
an
Immigration
Officer to give such directions in relation to illegal
entrants
to the
United
Kingdom,
who have not been given leave to
enter
and
remain
there, as
are
authorised by
Paragraph
8( 1) of the
same
Schedule.
Paragraph
8( 1) provides for the
return
of the illegal
entrant
to the place from where he
had
come.
Paragraph
16(2)
authorises the
Immigration
Officer to
detain
him
pending
his return.
There
was no first-hand evidence as to
whether
or not the
Applicant
had
in fact passed through
Immigration.
In
addition, the
one
document
which
might
have helped in this regard, namely the
Applicant's
passport,
had
been lost.
One
of
the Applicant's explana-
tions as to how this
had
happened
appeared
in the files of the Pakistani
Embassy, to
whom
he
had
applied for a new passport.
There
it was said
that
he
had
lost his briefcase containing his
passport
on the
tube
train
to
Hounslow.
The
other
explanation
put
forward by the
Applicant
was
contained
in his Affidavit to the
Court.
There
he
stated
that
on his
arrival in
Manchester
he discovered
that
the leather bag containing the
passport
had
been left behind
atHeathrow.
Athird
account
was given
6
To continue reading
Request your trial