Scottish Human Rights Law Group

P’s application for judicial review of the decision of the secretary of state to deport P and state that P’s human rights claim was clearly unfounded was granted.  The court held that the issue for determination was whether developments in Sri Lanka since the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (AIT) decision gave P’s claim some real prospect of success. 

P, a Tamil from Sri Lanka, and a high profile, combatant member of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). The AIT was held that as membership of the LTTE was no longer a criminal offence in Sri Lanka there was no evidence to suggest that P would be wanted by the authorities should he return, and therefore, no risk to his human rights.  However, the AIT did concede that if he were to be referred to the Sri Lankan Criminal Investigation Department on his return, there would be a serious risk to his human rights.

The court considered three matters in relation to developments in Sri Lanka and determined that having regard to those matters it was apparent that P’s human rights claim would have some real prospect of success.  Those matters were:

(i) the LTTE had effectively been criminalised by a new tougher set of criminal regulations which the Sri Lankan government had put in place one month after the AIT decision;

(ii) cases determined after the AIT decision made it apparent that the situation for Tamils returning to Sri Lanka had worsened.  Also, it was apparent that as a combatant member of the LTTE P would be at the higher spectrum of Tamils of interest to the Sri Lankan authorities;

(iii) UK Government assessments found that after the defeat of the LTTE by Sri Lankan forces, high profile returning Tamils such as those with LTTE connections would face additional questioning and possible investigation, and detention, by the authorities, including the Sri Lankan Criminal Investigation Department.