A legal battle over the age of a Sudanese asylum seeker has taken a surprising turn after judges ruled that he should be considered a child, despite initial assessments suggesting he was much older.

The Home Office had originally determined that the individual, who claimed to be 16, was actually at least 23 years old.

Their decision was based on physical features such as a receding hairline, thick facial hair, and signs of aging, including crow’s feet and a broad chest.

Home Office’s Initial Rejection

The Sudanese migrant arrived in the UK on September 6, 2023, after fleeing conflict in his home country.

His journey took him through Libya, Tunisia, Italy, and France before he crossed the English Channel.

Upon his arrival, he applied for asylum, stating that he was born on April 3, 2007, which would make him 16 at the time.

However, officials from the Home Office and Hounslow Borough Council raised immediate concerns about his age.

A formal assessment conducted in April 2023 concluded that he was between 23 and 25 years old, leading to his placement in adult asylum accommodations in West London.

Tribunal Overturns Home Office Decision

The asylum seeker’s legal team challenged the government’s findings, arguing that he was indeed a minor.

By December 2023, he had been moved into children’s accommodation while his case was reviewed.

The tribunal, led by Judges Hugo Norton-Taylor and Sarah Pinder, ultimately ruled in favor of the migrant.

They overturned both the September and May 2023 assessments, concluding that his account of his age was “more likely than not” accurate.

Financial Burden and Political Reactions

The ruling has placed financial strain on the local council responsible for his care, as they now face legal expenses exceeding £30,000.

The case has also fueled political debate, with opposition leader Sir Keir Starmer calling the decision “wrong” and urging the Home Office to close any legal loopholes that allowed for such an outcome.

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and Tory leader Kemi Badenoch have faced criticism for condemning judicial decisions related to asylum cases.

Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr has since stated that political leaders should refrain from publicly criticizing judges in these matters.

What Happens Next?

With the tribunal’s ruling now in place, the asylum seeker will be treated as a minor in his asylum application.

This means he will receive the rights and protections granted to child refugees in the UK.

However, the Home Office may still appeal the decision or introduce stricter age assessment policies to prevent similar cases in the future.

For now, the ruling sets a precedent for future asylum age disputes and adds another layer of complexity to the UK’s immigration policies.

This article was published on TDPel Media. Thanks for reading!

Share on Facebook «||» Share on Twitter «||» Share on Reddit «||» Share on LinkedIn