The asylum claimant was a Tamil whose surveying and reconnaissance work in support of LTTE military operations enabled that group more accurately to target the Sri Lankan forces. The appellant was never involved in any conflict causing injury or death to civilians. It was said that he should be excluded from protection by asylum because of his involvement in criminal acts. The AIT nevertheless held him disqualified from refugee protection by reference to article 1F(c). It was common ground that ‘acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations’ included acts of terrorism such as the deliberate killing of civilians – holding ‘the appellant must have known the type of organisation he was joining, its purpose and the extent to which the organisation was prepared to go to meet its aims.’
Held: The application of article 1F(c) will be straightforward in the case of an active member of [an] organisation that promotes its objects only by acts of terrorism. There will almost certainly be serious reasons for considering that he has been guilty of [relevant] acts . .
However, the LTTE, during the period when [the appellant] was a member, was not such an organisation. It pursued its political ends in part by acts of terrorism and in part by military action directed against the armed forces of the Government of Sri Lanka. The application of article 1F(c) is less straightforward in such a case. A person may join such an organisation, because he agrees with its political objectives, and be willing to participate in its military actions, but may not agree with and may not be willing to participate in its terrorist activities. Of course, the higher up in the organisation a person is the more likely will be the inference that he agrees with and promotes all of its activities, including its terrorism. But it seems to me that a foot soldier in such an organisation, who has not participated in acts of terrorism, and in particular has not participated in the murder or attempted murder of civilians, has not been guilty of acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.’
Judges:
Stanley Burnton LJ
Citations:
[2009] EWCA Civ 292
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – JS (Sri Lanka), Regina (on The Application of) v Secretary of State for The Home Department SC 17-Mar-2010
The asylum seeker was accused of complicity in war crimes in Sri Lanka. He had worked as an intelligence officer but his cover had been broken and he fled to the UK. It was said that he was excluded from protection as an asylum seeker.
Held: . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Immigration
Updated: 24 July 2022; Ref: scu.329540