N2, appeal by
| Jurisdiction | UK Non-devolved |
| Judgment Date | 01 December 2016 |
| Case Outcome | Dismissed |
| Court | Special Immigration Appeals Commission |
| Appellant | N2 |
| Subject Matter | Deportation |
Page 1
Appeal No: SC/125/2015
Hearing Dates: 8 & 9 November 2016
Date of Judgment: 1 December 2016
SPECIAL IMMIGRATION APPEALS COMMISSION
Before:
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE FLAUX
UPPER TRIBUNAL JUDGE OCKELTON, VICE PRESIDENT OF
THE UPPER TRIBUNAL
MS JILL BATTLEY
N2
APPELLANT
and
SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT
RESPONDENT
For the Appellant: Mr Danny Friedman QC and Mr Edward
Grieves
Instructed by: Birnberg Peirce & Partners
For the Respondent: Mr Robin Tam QC and Ms Melanie
Cumberland
Instructed by: Government Legal Department
JUDGMENT
Page 2
The Honourable Mr Justice Flaux:
Introduction and background
1. The appellant, (to whom we will refer as “N2” or “the appellant”), is a
Jordanian national. He claims to have entered the United Kingdom on 5
September 2002 on a false passport. On 6 September 2002 he claimed asylum.
On 16 October 2002, his asylum claim was refused and certified as manifestly
fraudulent. On 17 September 2003, his appeal was dismissed.
2. On 4 and 5 July 2007 at the Crown Court at Manchester following a trial
before His Honour Judge Maddison, the Honorary Recorder of Manchester (as
he then was) and a jury, the appellant was convicted on six counts of
possession of a record of information for a purpose connected with the
commission or preparation of an act of terrorism contrary to section 57 of the
Terrorism Act 2000. The record in question consisted of terrorist material
downloaded onto two of the appellant’s computers. He was also convicted on
two counts of acquiring criminal property, which it is accepted by the
Secretary of State had no connection with the Terrorism Act offences and
which are therefore irrelevant for present purposes.
3. On 6 July 2007, he was sentenced by His Honour Judge Maddison to nine
years’ imprisonment concurrent on each of the section 57 counts and 12
months imprisonment concurrent on the counts of acquiring stolen property, a
total sentence of nine years imprisonment. The basis upon which he was
sentenced in relation to the Terrorism Act offences was, as the judge held, that
he was a sleeper for a terrorist organisation. On 6 November 2008, the Court
of Appeal Criminal Division dismissed N2’s application for permission to
appeal against conviction and sentence.
4. Various notices of liability to deportation were served on the appellant and,
after a complex history which it is not necessary to recite in this judgment, on
10 July 2015 the Secretary of State served the appellant with a letter of refusal
of asylum and exclusion from refugee status under Article 1F(c) of the
Refugee Convention and a Deportation Order. The appellant appealed against
that refusal and Deportation Order to the Commission.
5. On 15 July 2016, the Secretary of State wrote to the appellant’s solicitors to
inform them that she had formed the view that it was no longer appropriate to
pursue the appellant’s deportation to Jordan at present and the Deportation
Order was withdrawn. However, the letter maintained the appellant’s
exclusion from refugee status and granted him six months restricted leave to
remain.
6. Notwithstanding that grant of leave to remain, the appellant gave notice that
he wished to pursue his appeal on asylum and humanitarian protection
grounds. The single issue for determination by the Commission at this stage is
whether the appellant is excluded from the protection of the Refugee
Convention, pursuant to Article 1(F)(c). A finding of exclusion from the
protection of the Refugee Convention pursuant to Article 1F(c) would have
Page 3
the necessary consequence that he would be likewise excluded from a grant of
humanitarian protection pursuant to paragraph 339D(ii) of the Immigration
Rules, so there is no need for us to consider the humanitarian protection
ground separately.
The legal framework
Article 1F and its application in domestic law
7. Article 1(F) of the Refugee Convention excludes three types of person from
the definition of refugee:
“The provisions of this Convention shall not apply to any
person with respect to whom there are serious reasons for
considering that:
(a) he has committed a crime against peace, a war crime, or a
crime against humanity, as defined in the international
instruments drawn up to make provision in respect of such
crimes;
(b) he has committed a serious non-political crime outside the
country of refuge prior to his admission to that country as a
refugee;
(c) he has been guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and
principles of the United Nations.”
8. This Article is mirrored in Article 12(2) of EU Council Directive 2004/83/EC
(“the Qualification Directive”) which also expands slightly on Article 1(F)
(the changes and additions are italicised):
“2. A third country national or a stateless person is excluded
from being a refugee where there are serious reasons for
considering that:
(a) he or she has committed a crime against peace, a war crime,
or a crime against humanity, as defined in the international
instruments drawn up to make provision in respect of such
crimes;
(b) he or she has committed a serious non-political crime
outside the country of refuge prior to his or her admission [to
that country] as a refugee; which means the time of issuing a
residence permit based on the granting of refugee status;
particularly cruel actions, even if committed with an allegedly
political objective, may be classified as serious non-political
crimes;
(c) he or she has been guilty of acts contrary to the purposes
and principles of the United Nations as set out in the Preamble
and articles 1 and 2 of the Charter of the United Nations.
To continue reading
Request your trial