6 days Ago By The Telegraph
A drug user from Afghanistan has won his claim to stay in the UK after a judge ruled that the Taliban treated addicts too harshly. The man, who left the country when he was a child, was successful in his appeal on the grounds that his mental health and addiction issues, along with the likelihood of him being perceived as “Westernised”, put him at risk of harm from the regime. Judge Rebecca Chapman said that if the “vulnerable” asylum seeker was returned to Afghanistan , he “could be imprisoned and forced to go cold turkey”, without access to methadone, “which would inevitably result in a deterioration” of his mental health.
She further ruled he would be at risk of persecution, in breach of his rights under the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR), because “persons perceived to be Westernised may be seen as non-Afghani or non-Muslim and that profile might overlap with transgressing societal norms”. The judge’s comments came despite her hearing evidence that Afghanistan was the world’s leading producer of opium, with 10 per cent of its population estimated to be addicts . But she ruled that the man’s history of drug addiction meant he would ultimately be at risk of “inhuman and degrading” treatment, in breach of article three of the ECHR if he were to return to the country, and so granted him asylum .
‘Vulnerable’ man with ‘transient’ lifestyle The upper immigration tribunal was told the man, thought to be 39 years old, first applied for asylum in 2010, having arrived in the UK aged nine. He was described as “vulnerable” with a long-term drug addiction and a “transient” lifestyle, and was also said to have “difficult” relationships with his family members. His lawyers said that owing to his various issues, he was likely to be perceived as “Westernised” in Afghanistan and having transgressed moral and religious codes, which meant he would be seen as non-Muslim.
They said he was “not a very religious person”, did not fast or pray regularly and actively opposed the views of the Taliban. The judge noted that the man, who had been diagnosed with PTSD and depression , would face a regime where drug addicts were “rounded up, beaten and imprisoned where they were forced to go cold turkey without access to methadone or counselling”. Since the Taliban regained control of Afghanistan in 2021, many of the country’s drug treatment centres have been closed down.
The judgment noted a report from the broadcaster Al Jazeera, which said that the “physical abuse and imprisonment” of drug addicts by the Taliban was “systemic and indiscriminate”. Ruling that the man could remain in the UK, the judge said: “Given the [asylum seeker’s] attitude towards the Taliban, lack of strict adherence to Islam, his mode of dress, history of drug addiction and 30-year absence from the country, I find in light of the background evidence that the appellant would be at risk of harm if returned to Afghanistan. “I find that there is a reasonable likelihood that .
.. [he] would be subjected to persecution by the Taliban on account of his individual characteristics which would place him within a particular social group.
” The ruling, disclosed in court papers, comes following previous cases exposed by The Telegraph in which illegal migrants or convicted foreign criminals have used human rights laws to remain in the UK. There is currently a record high of 41,987 immigration appeals that remain outstanding, largely on human rights grounds. Labour has pledged to clear the backlog and has set a new target for appeals to come to court within 24 weeks – half the current average of nearly 50 weeks.
.
.jpg.webp?itok=UddcOLza)