Asylum seeker suspected of recruiting child soldiers can stay in Britain

Telegraph

07-06-2025

An asylum seeker suspected of recruiting child soldiers for the Tamil Tigers has won a human rights case to stay in Britain.
The Sri Lankan has been allowed to remain in the UK despite claims he had 'enlisted children under the age of 15' in the militant group.
The French justice system previously ruled that he should be denied asylum in France due to the allegations, an immigration tribunal heard.
However, British judges ruled that there was not enough evidence to say the allegations were true, and he has been granted refugee status.
The Home Office, which attempted to deport him, tried to fight the ruling, but lost its appeal.
The identity of the migrant has not been revealed as he was granted anonymity by the Upper Tribunal of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber.
The hearing, in London, was told that before he arrived in the UK, the Sri Lankan was alleged to have recruited child soldiers for the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) - also known as the Tamil Tigers.
The LTTE is a militant terrorist organisation founded in Sri Lanka.
It was heard that the unnamed Sri Lankan was working for the Tamils Rehabilitation Organisation (TRO) - a refugee charity - but was secretly supplying information.
Before arriving in the UK, the French asylum court - the Cour nationale du droit d'asile - found that he 'ought to be excluded from a grant of asylum under Article 1F of the Refugee Convention due to his alleged involvement in war crimes, in this case the alleged recruitment of children'.
In Britain, the Home Office refused him refugee status, but in 2023, he won an appeal at the First-tier Tribunal of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber against the decision.
At the time, the judge found that the Home Office 'had not shown serious grounds for concluding that [the Sri Lankan] was guilty of the war crime of conscription or enlistment of children under the age of 15 or using them to participate actively in hostilities'.
The judge at the 2023 hearing concluded: 'I am not satisfied even on the evidence of his own admissions, accurate or otherwise, to the French that this goes far enough to show that the [Sri Lankan] was effectively collecting information which he knew was going to be misused, and misused specifically for the recruitment of child soldiers under the age of 15.
'Nor am I satisfied that there are serious reasons for considering on all the evidence adduced that the [respondent] has been shown to have knowingly materially assisted in the recruitment of child soldiers under the age of 15, by the work done by the TRO in gathering information, possibly subsequently used by the LTTE for that purpose.'
The Home Office appealed that decision at the Upper Tribunal, but lost its case.
Home Office lawyers argued that the judge in 2023 did not attach enough weight to the French court decision.
Lawyers argued that the judge 'ought to have followed the French Court and that inadequate reasons were given by the judge for not doing so'.
But, Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Adrian Seelhoff ruled that the 2023 hearing considered the French decision 'extensively'.
Judge Seelhoff said: 'The Judge assessed that evidence to see if it supported the [Home Office's] case that [the Sri Lankan], whilst working for the TRO, supplied details which the LTTE used to recruit child soldiers.
'[The Home Office's] position before us was not that the judge was bound to follow the French court decision, but that he had not given adequate reasons for reaching a different decision or that he failed to attach weight to the decision.
'We find that the judge did give adequate reasons for not following that decision, and for the weight he attached to it and that accordingly there is no error of law in the decision under appeal.'