Migrant Who Sexually Assaulted Woman Allowed To Stay In UK After Claiming To Be Gay

Despite offering no evidence, a Pakistani man, who was convicted of sexually assaulting a woman and lived in Britain illegally, was allowed to stay after he claimed he was gay.

The unnamed 53 yr old sex offender had been living in the UK illegally for 11 years but was granted refugee status after arguing he was homosexual and would face persecution in his home country in breach of his human rights.

He made his asylum claim and insisted that he was gay just weeks after being convicted of assaulting the woman.

Gates Whistleblower: Chemtrails Drugs Are Turning People Into Pedophiles

However, his case will be now be reheard after an upper immigration tribunal backed a second challenge to the Pakistani’s asylum claim by the Home Office.

The Telegraph reports: The Pakistani, known only as MR, came to the UK in 2006 as a student but overstayed his visa which ran out in December 2006. He applied for leave to remain on human rights grounds in 2012 but the Home Office rejected it that year.

In May 2017, he was arrested by police and in the same year he was convicted for sexually assaulting a woman by touching. A month later, he claimed asylum – asserting a “fear of persecution” in Pakistan if he were to be deported.

Despite pleading guilty to the sex assault, he claimed in his asylum application that he was innocent and that he was gay. However, then home secretary Suella Braverman refused him leave to remain. Mrs Braverman said there was “no evidence of a substantial relationship being in place” despite MR claiming he was in a gay relationship.

He appealed against the decision, claiming to have been in a relationship with a Mr K since 2019 even though there was no evidence they lived together, no shared bills, and no other documentary evidence which supported their relationship. He was also “inconsistent” as to when he realised he was gay.

Home Office lawyer fails to challenge claims

In his appeal hearing, however, the Home Office lawyer failed to cross-examine him about his homosexuality, even after the judge adjourned the case for her to restart her questioning and challenge him over the claims.

First-tier Tribunal Judge Anthony Cartin said: “I made clear that if there was no challenge on these matters, I would make a note to this effect and was likely to allow the appeal.”

Due to the lack of challenge, he said he did not need to hear from Mr K and MR’s other witness, found that MR was gay, and allowed his appeal to stay in the UK.

The Home Office has since appealed against Judge Cartin’s decision and an Upper Tribunal found he erred in law.

Upper Tribunal Judge Declan O’Callaghan said the Home Office was deprived of the chance to question MR’s two witnesses, who they believed would not provide convincing arguments that MR was gay.

As a result, Judge O’Callaghan said MR’s sexuality was not properly considered “in the round” which meant the hearing had been “procedurally unfair”. “The only proper course is to set aside the decision in its entirety,” the judge said.

A new hearing will take place at a later date.