High court judge rules that gay asylum seeker who feared persecution in Uganda should have been allowed to remain

This article is more than 1 year old

This article is more than 1 year old

The Home Office has been ordered to help a woman deported to Uganda six years ago to return to Britain after a high court judge ruled that the handling of her case was “procedurally unfair”.

If the judgment stands, the woman may become the first deportee whose case was processed through fast-track rules operational between 2005 and 2015 to return to the UK and appeal against the decision to deport her.

The ruling could encourage similar appeals from thousands of people whose asylum claims were treated under the same system.

Movement for Justice, a human rights group helping to support the woman in Uganda, said the Home Office was likely to appeal against the court’s decision. Government lawyers sought “permission to appeal” following the verdict on 26 June, a move rejected by the judge within 24 hours. The government could now take the case to an appeal court, to block the woman’s return.

The woman, referred to in court documents as “PN”, cannot be named because her sexuality exposes her to serious risk of persecution in Uganda, where she now lives.

Human rights campaigners said the Home Office may have exposed PN to years of ill-treatment by sending her back to Uganda, where LGBTQ people face extreme violence.

The verdict came as Pride festivals and parades, celebrating the LGBTQ community, began around the world. In London on Tuesday, 10 Downing Street decorated its front door with an arch of rainbow-coloured flowers in support.

The ruling brought fresh embarrassment for the Home Office, which has been beleaguered by a series of accusations of overzealous deportations and doublespeak relating to its treatment of members of the LGBTQ community.

Shahmir Sanni 🏳️‍🌈 (@shahmiruk) Everyone that attended the Pride reception today, hope you enjoyed drinking and partying with the people that outed me. 😊 https://t.co/z0JAr56QA9

On Thursday, UK Black Pride issued a statement saying it was removing the stalls of the Home Office and the National Crime Agency from its event on Sunday. A statement said the decision was made in light of “continued discrimination against the communities we represent, and the work we and other organisations connected to us do in support of LGBTQ refugees and asylum seekers”.

The fast-track appeals system introduced by Tony Blair’s government in 2005 gave appellants just 14 days to gather evidence for their claims to asylum in the UK.

The system was introduced at a time when the Labour party faced increasing pressure to clamp down on immigration after its open-door policy resulted in a rapid rise in immigration to the UK. It was kept in place by successive governments until 2015.

In June 2015, Mr Justice Nicol ruled that the system was “structurally unfair” because of the “abbreviated timetable” and the “the restricted case management powers available to the judge”. That verdict was upheld in appeals court.

More than 10,000 cases were decided in the period when the fast-track appeals system was operational.

While judges decided not to automatically reopen all 10,000 cases that were decided under the fast-track rules, appellants can bring individual claims against their deportation if they can show that they did not have enough time to gather evidence.

In October 2015, PN filed a claim for a judicial review of her case. For four years, her claim bounced around the legal system until it reached the high court in 2017.

PN came to the UK in 2010 aged 17 and stayed in the country after her visa expired. She worked as a hairdresser and had a girlfriend named Mildred. She stayed in the UK because she feared her uncle would kill her if she returned to Uganda.

After she was arrested for overstaying, PN was sent to Yarl’s Wood immigration centre. The judgment documents the rapid decline in her health and emotional state while she was detained, referring to medical notes that suggested she was having flashbacks and may have been suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder. One doctor noted she was suffering from “insomnia, depressive mood with suicidal thoughts and hallucinatory phenomena”.

The judgment also noted that one doctor reported her sexual development was “consistent with homosexual orientation”.

PN’s claim for asylum was rejected on the grounds that there was insufficient proof to show that she was a lesbian. She was granted two weeks to appeal the claim – but that wasn’t long enough to prove that she had had lesbian relationships in Uganda and the UK, or to access her medical records, her lawyer argued in court. She was subsequently deported.

Last week, Mr Justice Lewis concluded that the fast track appeals system “did not give her sufficient opportunity to obtain evidence from Uganda to support her claim”.

Karen Doyle, a campaigner at Movement for Justice, said the possibility of a Home Office appeal was “devastating” for her.

“She really has been through hell,” Doyle said. “She just wants to come back so she can be safe.”

“I think the UK should be ashamed of what’s happened to PN,” said Alex Schymyck, a writer for Free Movement, a website about immigration law. “The mere risk that she’s been exposed to persecution because of an unfair appeal system is completely unacceptable.”

The Home Office declined to comment while proceedings continue. PN’s legal advisers, who believe she remains extremely vulnerable while in Uganda, also declined to comment.