sidney
August 20th, 2009, 08:32 PM
I don't know why I find these interesting and keep posting them here, but here's another strange story from the legal world that I heard on the NZ radio news today:
An Iranian man whose claim for refugee status was denied by Immigration was in the news as people protested the decision and he went on a hunger strike. The protests were over the denial of refugee status to someone who faced deportation back to Iran where a death sentence awaited him for converting to Christianity.
The end result of the highly publicized case was that he won on appeal and was granted refugee status.
The latest news regarding the case is the release of the report by the appeals board, after a court finding that the man had waived his right to privacy in the case by his actions to publicize it.
The report reveals that the appeals board found that the man had fabricated the documents regarding the death sentence, had not converted to Christianity, and had manipulated his friends, co-workers, and other supporters into protesting his deportation, his claim for refugee status being on completely fraudulent grounds.
So why did the appeals board approve his claim? The publicity surrounding his case resulted in a credible threat to his safety by people who would believe his claims if he were to be deported to Iran. That threat qualified him to be given refugee status.
They did recommend that if the situation in Iran changes so that he no longer would be in danger there, he should be deported immediately.
An Iranian man whose claim for refugee status was denied by Immigration was in the news as people protested the decision and he went on a hunger strike. The protests were over the denial of refugee status to someone who faced deportation back to Iran where a death sentence awaited him for converting to Christianity.
The end result of the highly publicized case was that he won on appeal and was granted refugee status.
The latest news regarding the case is the release of the report by the appeals board, after a court finding that the man had waived his right to privacy in the case by his actions to publicize it.
The report reveals that the appeals board found that the man had fabricated the documents regarding the death sentence, had not converted to Christianity, and had manipulated his friends, co-workers, and other supporters into protesting his deportation, his claim for refugee status being on completely fraudulent grounds.
So why did the appeals board approve his claim? The publicity surrounding his case resulted in a credible threat to his safety by people who would believe his claims if he were to be deported to Iran. That threat qualified him to be given refugee status.
They did recommend that if the situation in Iran changes so that he no longer would be in danger there, he should be deported immediately.