The Home Office was unable to use its main tactic of combating Channel migrant boats. Yesterday, judges invalidated three convictions in people-smuggling.
Appeal Court overturned Iranian pilots of migrant dinghies.
Judges declared the charges ‘unsafe’ as the initial prosecutions did not consider whether any of the defendants or their guests intended to enter the country illegally.
The Home Office has secured scores of convictions against would-be asylum seekers after gathering evidence – including video footage – showing they had been at the helm of small boats in the Channel.
Appeal Court overturned Iranians’ sentences for piloting migrant dinghies. File image
Yesterday’s ruling cast doubt upon the use of such tactics, and many other sentences could be challenged with similar grounds.
Yesterday’s judges revealed that there are seven more similar appeals pending.
Appeal Court dismissed charges of aiding or facilitating unlawful immigration against Samyar Bani (Mahamoud Al-Anzi) and Fariborz Taker Rakei.
In November 2019, Mr Bani was convicted and sentenced for six years in prison. He was convicted by Border Force agents after he piloted a small vessel with four others and a child in June 2019.
They were captured at sea and taken to Dover. His trial revealed that Mr Bani had a mobile phone with him, which he used to call to purchase the boat and to check the forecast for the crossing.
Al Anzi was one of twelve people who were aboard the dinghy last June. He was sentenced in February to three years, nine months in prison.
Yesterday’s ruling will put doubt on these tactics, and many other sentences could be challenged on similar grounds. File image
He was sentenced to four-years and six months in prison for a different incident the following month. The 13-year-old Rakei had an inflatable with a rigid-hulled hull and was carrying a compass, three mobiles, and other items.
An appeal by a fourth Iranian man – Ghodratallah Zadeh, who pleaded guilty in October last year to assisting unlawful immigration and was sentenced to two years’ imprisonment – was not formally quashed as he is expected to face a retrial.
Court of Appeal Judges, presided by Lord Justice Edis found in each case that the intention of the boat’s occupants to violate the law by not declaring their arrival in the UK, such as landing on a beach or running away, was not established.
The British authorities noted that an migrant taken into custody by British officials in Channel does not commit any offence.
‘A matter which the prosecution must prove – that at the time of the facilitation the appellant knew or had reasonable cause to believe that his act was assisting entry or attempted entry into the United Kingdom without leave – was not properly investigated and was then not left for the jury to decide,’ the ruling said.
“We are unable to accept the argument of the prosecution that the convictions can be acquitted despite the failures. The mistakes were too fundamental to allow that.
The Home Office stated that they needed to “fully digest” the judgment.
Judges of Court of Appeal, headed by Lord Justice Edis (file image), found it unclear that the four boat occupants intended to inflict an offense by not declaring their arrival in Britain by landing on a shore and fleeing.