TW
0

by RAY FLEMING l IT is hardly surprising that ministers in the British government are sensitive about the role of the judiciary and the increasing number of occasions on which it feels necessary to criticise the inadequacy of new legislation or ministerial actions taken under it. At the end of last week a scathing rebuke was handed down by the three judges of an asylum and immigration tribunal which had considered the case of a Zimbabwean who appealed aganst the decision of the Home Office to deport him to Zimbabwe where he claimed he would be handed straight over to the security police. The chairman of the tribunal, Mr Mark Ockleton said that he was alarmed by “the lack of interest” shown by Chalres Clarke, the Home Secretary, in “the process by which individuals he returns to Zimbabwe are received by the authorities there” and by the fact that the Home Office had made no effort to discover what had happened to the failed asylum applicants who were forcibly sent back to Zimbabwe earlier this year. The case being considered was that of a man who had fraudulently claimed asylum in Britain and had been dishonest in his dealings with the British authorities. For instance, he had claimed to be an active member of the MDC opposition in Zimbabwe but could not say what the initials stood for. However the tribunal ruled that his dishonesty did not affect the fact that he had become a refugee and would face real risk of harm if he returned to Zimbabwe, and that consequently he should not be deported. This was a test case for some 200 Zimbabweans who have been refused asylum and its outcome means that the Home Office will not be able to proceed with its planned deportation of them. Evidence was given to the tribunal that any Zimbabwean who has claimed asylum in Britain is considered a traitor by President Mugabe's regime and that the Home Office's deportations are regarded as “a cloak for an attempt to infiltrate Blair's spies into the country”. Given what is known of the lawless police state that Zimbabwe has become it is very surprising indeed that the Home Office even thinks of sending any one back there forcibly.