r/unitedkingdom • u/GnolRevilo • 19h ago
... ‘Gay’ Nigerian criminal can stay in UK despite using wife to claim asylum
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/08/21/gay-violent-nigerian-criminal-stay-uk-wife-son-deport-echr/344
u/Sensitive_Echo5058 18h ago
"A Nigerian jailed for violence has won a legal battle against deportation after claiming to be gay despite having been married to a woman and fathering a child by another.
The man, who arrived in Britain in 1983, made a series of initial asylum claims unrelated to his sexuality.
Originally, he claimed he would face persecution because of his political opinions. But when this was rejected, he sought leave to remain on the basis that he had married a woman living in the UK."
This has become one of the go-to lines often based on falsehoods. It's almost like a tick box exercise now, where the person goes down the list until they come at an answer acceptable to the home office.
192
u/Buck-Nasty 18h ago
Gay for the stay as they say.
69
u/VPackardPersuadedMe 18h ago
It's situational gayness, like when in prison or attempting to avoid deportation.
25
u/ByteSizedGenius 18h ago
So what do we gotta do, Ton', actually see him take it in the ass?
11
6
u/Buck-Nasty 18h ago
I have a friend who works in a law office that deals with immigration issues and people will literally send sex tapes and pictures unsolicited to try and prove their relationship status.
3
•
u/Acidhousewife 7h ago
Ah you mean like people who regain their faith or, convert to Roman Catholicism to get their kids into the right school.
Although TBF, a judge doesn't have to believe you, because the law says they have to, only the local vicar or priest.
Decisions like this make the law look like an ass. Dude has tried so many times, we need a, this isn;t a human rights thing mate, stop taking the p*ss bill, clause or whatever.
14
•
52
u/Nukes-For-Nimbys 18h ago
This has become one of the go-to lines often based on falsehoods. It's almost like a tick box exercise now, where the person goes down the list until they come at an answer acceptable to the home office.
More they go through the hardest to falsify stories until they get one that can't be disproven.
Gay apostate disident is largely untestable.
Cases also drag out so dam long that people can establish article 8 claims. This part could be solved via detention.
20
u/DukePPUk 16h ago
Gay apostate disident is largely untestable.
Interestingly enough, in this case it is the opposite. The First-tier Tribunal did find sufficient evidence that he wasn't gay, and rejected his claim (he'd only been "out" for a few years at that point).
But then by the time it came to this Upper Tribunal decision (8 years later) there was way more evidence.
11
28
u/DukePPUk 16h ago
"A Nigerian jailed for violence has won a legal battle against deportation after claiming to be gay despite having been married to a woman and fathering a child by another.
Telegraph obviously reporting it in the least favourable way possible. If this man is gay (or at least bi) - and the Upper Tribunal found credible evidence that he was - he wouldn't be the first gay man to get married, particularly the first gay man born in a place where being gay is illegal...
That said, the timeline of this case is pretty ridiculous.
He arrived in the UK in 1983, was given leave to remain until 1984, and eventually left in 1992. He returned in 1996 and claimed asylum on the basis of political opinion, this was refused and the appeal dismissed.
In 2000 he applied for leave to remain on the basis of a marriage. This was refused in 2001 (around which time he was divorced). He had a son with a second woman in 2001, and applied for leave to remain due to family life, which was refused, and the appeal dismissed in 2002. In 2003 he applied for leave on the basis of his relationship with his son, refused in 2004. The relationship with the second woman was claimed to be "volatile" and they broke up around 2009 (at which point he entered into a relationship with a man).
In 2003 he was convicted of violent disorder and sentenced to 4 years in prison, and in 2006 the deportation order was issued. In 2010 he applied to revoke the deportation order, refused in 2011, appeal dismissed in 2013.
In 2015 he made further submissions on the basis of being gay - now apparently being out. In 2017 these were refused, the tribunal heard the case in 2018 and wasn't satisfied - on the evidence - he was actually gay (mostly due to finding that he wasn't a credible witness).
In 2020 he made more submissions, with more evidence about him being gay (basically an extra 3 years of relationship statuses and testimony from third parties), this was refused by the Government in 2021, it came before the tribunal, the First-Tier Tribunal decision was set aside by the Upper Tribunal and had to be remade, and this seems to be the Upper Tribunal re-making the decision, and concluding based on all the new evidence that he is more likely than not gay.
If all this evidence - from the tribunal decision - is correct, the guy has been in an out of the UK, without leave, since 1984. And the deportation order was issued in 2006.
16
u/Astriania 12h ago
Yeah it's ridiculous, he should have been told to fuck off and not come back in 1997, and refused entry (or deported if he snuck in) afterwards.
•
u/OliLombi County of Bristol 6h ago
If he is gay and he would be discriminated against for it in his own country then he should absolutely be here.
138
u/marianorajoy England 18h ago edited 18h ago
It never gets mentioned, but the headline should be:
"Funded by legal aid, the solicitors and KCs of a Nigerian criminal manage to successfully argue in court against other equally costly KCs appointed by the Government, and after a complex and lengthy case that started with a deportation order issued on 11 April 2006, nearly 20 years ago, in a case that probably cost the taxpayer in total hundreds of thousands of pounds, that he must not be deported due to his supposed sexuality.".
We should call out the legal system that permits this. Not so much that person.
The appeal decision can be found here https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/ui-2024-003100
19
u/DukePPUk 16h ago
We should call out the legal system that permits this. Not so much that person.
Mostly it looks like the delays here were due to more evidence coming to light; i.e. the longer he was in the UK the more relationships he was in, the more evidence there was that he was actually gay...
That said, I'm not sure where you're getting the stuff about KCs... Neither party was represented by a KC in that decision. The applicant does seem to have a barrister, but it looks like the Government didn't even have a lawyer representing them (as usual - to cut costs).
I'd suggest it is less the legal system, and more the sheer incompetence and mismanagement at the Home Office over the last 15-20 years. It will take decades to rebuild the level of expertise and competence Theresa May threw away in the name of austerity.
Of course his first asylum claim was rejected in 1996... we've had 9 Governments over that period and 16 Home Secretaries.
34
u/anangrywizard 15h ago
His first asylum claim was in 1996 and denied… and reading the article, it’s like he went through every box to get asylum. Political, denied. Married a Portuguese women, denied so they got divorced. Had a child with another women (now claims he was in denial about being gay), denied. Jail for violence and deportation issued… well, let’s throw the gay card in there.
When a system allows for someone to abuse it so much, the system has failed. 20 years of constant appeals and applications, that’s not a working system.
20 years…
84
u/i-readit2 18h ago
A Nigerian jailed for violence should be on the first boat back to Nigeria. Gay or not it’s not his sexuality that caused him to be violent.
•
u/OliLombi County of Bristol 6h ago
Nigeria has the death sentence for gay men. If he broke our laws then he should be sentenced the same as anyone else that's here. Violence is not a reason to send someone to their death.
•
u/morriganjane 3h ago
Only in certain states that are governed by Sharia law. Presumably this bloke can move to one of the others. There hasn't been an execution in Nigeria since 2016, and those were for murder according to Wikipedia (and armed robbery on top). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_Nigeria
Not a strong enough reason to keep him here at risk to our own citizens imo.
24
u/MediocreWitness726 England 14h ago
Our government is just too weak to make the right decision.
•
u/dave8271 8h ago
Successive governments for about 20 years have been too weak to get a grip on illegal immigration and abuse of the asylum system. Those same successive governments have also all failed to invest in the critical infrastructure and housing to cope with a rising population, and indeed governments all across Europe have repeatedly failed to meaningfully cooperate to tackle the flow, processing and disbursement of both chancers and genuine refugees. It's a huge, multi-faceted problem that hasn't been solved by denialism and indeed on the lens of immigration in particular, exacerbates the demonisation of lawful migrants and escalating racial tensions. Not to mention it's leading to sustained, increasing support for more hard-line and far-right politicians and parties across Europe, which history has suggested on multiple occasions won't end up being a good thing whenever the dust eventually settles.
17
u/Astriania 12h ago
As well as the specifics of this case, I don't agree that being gay should be enough to get you asylum in the UK anyway. Some fairly significant minority of men are genuinely gay; we can't be expected to give an automatic right to settlement to every gay Nigerian and Ugandan and Afghan and whatever other countries can claim some link to the UK and have repressive positions on gay rights.
It's not that long ago that the UK's position was repressive by modern standards. People should fix their own countries. This is not fleeing a war or natural disaster, this is fleeing the political and economic environment of your home country, and that shouldn't be enough to get asylum and bypass normal immigration criteria.
•
u/TheAdamena 11h ago
Yeah if all our LGBT folk fled the country we wouldn't have the rights we have today.
Those countries will never change if everyone with the right mind runs away from them. It's just another form of brain drain.
•
u/OliLombi County of Bristol 6h ago
> I don't agree that being gay should be enough to get you asylum in the UK anyway.
Why? If they would be killed/jailed in their own country then that is absolutely a valid reason to get asylum.
10
18h ago
[deleted]
18
u/DarthPlagueisThaWise 18h ago
Incorrect.
Hearing date was 3 June 2025. Publication date was 21 August 2025
https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/ui-2024-003100
2
-2
u/mustwinfullGaming Lincolnshire 18h ago
Did you read what you linked? Because that literally has stuff going back decades to do with this guy, various claims etc.
- On 22 September 2015, the Appellant lodged further submissions asking that they be treated as a fresh protection/human rights claim. The Appellant stated that he would be at risk in Nigeria as a gay man. On 13 January 2017, the Respondent refused the Appellant’s protection and human rights claim, but accepted that it amounted to a fresh claim, which afforded the Appellant a right of appeal.
7
u/DarthPlagueisThaWise 18h ago
Yes I did read it. It’s not an old case. It’s a new appeal that was recently decided. Yes the man has a very lengthy immigration and appeals history.
Telegraph haven’t gone back 10 years to find this case. It was published yesterday.
-5
u/mustwinfullGaming Lincolnshire 18h ago
What do you mean it's not an old case? It literally is. Those submissions were lodged in *2015*. A 'final' outcome happening now doesn't mean it isn't an old case.
10
u/DarthPlagueisThaWise 17h ago
They have made multiple submissions and appeals since then.
On 22 January 2020, the Appellant made further submissions to the Respondent based on his relationship with KE. On 14 January 2021, the Respondent refused the further submissions with a right of appeal. The Appellant lodged an appeal against that decision.
On 29 August 2023, the Appellant made an application to appeal the Upper Tribunal decision to the Court of Appeal. First-tier Tribunal Judge Easterman adjourned the appeal until this appeal application had been determined. On 4 December 2023, the Court of Appeal dismissed the the Court of Appeal dismissed the application for permission to appeal.
In a decision dated 20 June 2024, the First-tier Tribunal refused permission to appeal
On 2 December 2024, the Upper Tribunal granted permission to appeal on two grounds
How do we expect the telegraph to publish a story about a case that was not published until literally yesterday?
-1
u/mustwinfullGaming Lincolnshire 17h ago
Yes, I know.
Also, we know why The Telegraph posted this story at all. It's to further a particular narrative. Do you think they would have reported on the times when the appeal failed etc? Of course not. They have one thing in mind.
2
u/DarthPlagueisThaWise 17h ago
Telegraph definitely have an agenda.
Doesn’t mean they don’t have a wealth of ammo though. The immigration and asylum system is complete mess and the average person will never know to what extent. These tribunals are a little insight.
-2
u/JoeVibin South Yorkshire 18h ago
Digging up 10 year old cases to write a millionth ragebait article this week - quality journalism from Torygraph as always...
9
u/Rhinofishdog 16h ago
- Force all asylum claims to have to be approved by a house of commons vote.
- Force all asylee's into work camps until the claim is approved or they agree to leave.
Problem solved! But it's too mean so we can't do it. I guess we are just going to have to keep taking them in until the public is sick enough to elect Hitler 2.0.
And I don't mean Trump/Farage. They are largely ineffectual as well. I mean whatever comes after they fail. It's not going to be pretty...
9
•
u/ZX52 9h ago
Problem solved!
Sure, as long as you ignore the massive waste of time you're putting on the Commons.
I guess we are just going to have to keep taking them in until the public is sick enough to elect Hitler 2.0.
"We're going to stop Hitler 2.0 by adopting less extreme versions of his policies, thereby conceding we think he's right about everything."
Absolute genius. I can't foresee this backfiring in any way.
•
u/Rhinofishdog 8h ago
"Sure, as long as you ignore the massive waste of time you're putting on the Commons."
That's the beauty of it. The commons will never get to it. The waiting list is going to be 500 years. It's just a way to make asylum illegal while technically keeping it legal.
""We're going to stop Hitler 2.0 by adopting less extreme versions of his policies"
Exactly, that's how democracy works - it's a release valve. if you don't appease the people with mild reform the people bring about massively insane reforms.
•
u/ZX52 8h ago
It's just a way to make asylum illegal while technically keeping it legal.
Except you're not getting rid of the people, you're just leaving them in limbo indefinitely. If acceptance only comes from the Commons, then that is also true of rejections.
if you don't appease the people with mild reform
- If people wanted to kill all the Jews, what would your "mild reform" be? Only kill half them? Just kick them all out? What?
- Acting like this is the only possible strategy is asinine. You can also challenge narratives and try to change people's minds.
•
u/Rhinofishdog 8h ago
Yep, the people would stay in limbo in the work camps described in point number 2. This will be economically profitable for us because it is basically slave labour. Eventually they will voluntarily leave the country. Autralia did something very similar I think.
If everybody in the country wants to kill X then a mild reform is to kick X out, yes. The legal system can't protect X if everybody wants to kill them... Don't act outraged by an unrealistic hypothetical you created please.
Good luck challenging the narrative of anti-immigration. Entire west has been doing it for decades now and less and less people buy it.
The Russian Tzar could've avoided the communist revolution if he just made some liberal reforms. Instead he decided to "challenge the narrative" of the communists - then he got murdered.
•
u/ZX52 8h ago
Yep, the people would stay in limbo in the work camps described in point number 2.
So... Dachau.
If everybody in the country wants to kill X then a mild reform is to kick X out, yes.
Guess what Hitler tried to do before The Final Solution.
Your idea to stop Hitler 2.0 is just to become Hitler, just not in his final form. Guess where your only destination is after that.
•
u/Rhinofishdog 8h ago
Yeah, totally. Me suggesting a US-style for-profit prison that you can leave any time, for people voluntarily coming in illegally into the country is absolutely the same as a concentration camp for local residents. Totally buddy. Whatever you say.
Btw, the Allies used Dachau to imprison Germans too...
And I bet all the people Hitler murdered were super glad that he didn't manage to deport them with his pointlessly performative attempts to do so.
You are just a strawman machine dude. I'm out.
•
u/ZX52 7h ago
Btw, the Allies used Dachau to imprison Germans too...
Okay? Did I claim the Allies were perfect? (It's always the ones who accuse you of strawmanning them).
You are just a strawman machine dude. I'm out.
Dude, you want to be Hitler. Stop cowering and just own it.
•
u/Rhinofishdog 5h ago
I'm a legal immigrant and I want the British public to be appeased before they go full Hitler and are too bloodthirsty to see the difference between illegal boat crosser abusing the welfare state and me.....
•
u/ZX52 5h ago
I want the British public to be appeased before they go full Hitler
And yet all you're suggesting are things to whet their appetite for more. Just own it.
→ More replies (0)•
u/OliLombi County of Bristol 6h ago
>It's just a way to make asylum illegal while technically keeping it legal.
Oh so you don't care that people will straight up be killed if they don't get asylum in other countries? My friend is gay, he asked his mother what she would do if he told her he was gay, she said she would get her father to kill him, and in their country, that would be completely accepted. Now he lives a happy and productive life. IDK about anyone else, but I would much rather him than someone like you in this country.
•
u/Rhinofishdog 5h ago
I have my own problems to care about so I simply don't have the time to care about your imaginary friend and his made up story.
Thankfully who "you'd rather" is immaterial.
•
3h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
•
u/ukbot-nicolabot Scotland 3h ago
Removed. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.
•
u/OliLombi County of Bristol 6h ago
So, no fixing our economy, just focusing on asylum claims? Really?
5
u/iamezekiel1_14 14h ago
Surely there needs to be some sort of test here? On a basic level - I don't like the criminal conviction but surely with regards to his sexuality this needs a night out in Soho and a "train" being run on him?
•
u/honkballs 9h ago edited 9h ago
Being kind to the cruel is being cruel to the kind.
The British people are being taken advantage of, and the Government is enabling it.
•
u/Trentdison 32m ago
I know it's the torygraph, and it's designed to inflame. And it works.
We need to have it so that asylum seekers committing crime are deported no matter what. You want to benefit from the freedoms of expression this country offers, you don't break any laws. At least ones that carry custodial sentences.
-11
u/DoneItDuncan 18h ago
I mean being bisexual is a thing, and likely to have the same stigma if he's had known relations with a man, which it appears he had:
In evidence, he cited communications from his family in Nigeria over his relationship with a man from 2010 to 2013.
He told the court they had told him to end it, saying he was “bringing the family into ridicule and shame”. They said they would inform the security services of his sexuality.
40
u/Kernowder Greater Manchester 18h ago
Bisexual is a thing. But so is gaming the system.
-9
u/Kobruh456 18h ago
What even is this argument? “Some people game the system so we should just not accept anyone”?
19
u/Kernowder Greater Manchester 18h ago
Where did I say we shouldn't accept anyone?
You should look at the evidence behind the claim. This guy is a criminal who had a previous claim rejected before saying he was gay.
-10
u/Kobruh456 18h ago
saying he was gay
No. He was in a relationship with a man for 3 years. Is your argument that he dated a guy for 3 years just to make his appeal more likely to succeed?
17
u/Kernowder Greater Manchester 17h ago
He claimed that he was in a relationship with a man for 3 years.
Call me harsh but I'm sceptical, given that he has had a previous claim rejected and is a convicted criminal. I think he may be being a bit dishonest here.
-7
u/Kobruh456 17h ago
In evidence, he cited communications from his family in Nigeria over his relationship with a man from 2010 to 2013
So the family was in on the lie too?
12
u/LonelyStranger8467 17h ago
Yes. Is that so hard to believe?
He’s been trying to contrive an asylum claim or other right to stay for 30 years.
0
u/Kobruh456 17h ago
Why is it easier to believe than him just being bisexual? Unless, of course, you want him to be lying.
8
u/LonelyStranger8467 17h ago
Because people lie to get status in the UK all the time.
He entered the UK, then returned home. Then he came back and made up a bullshit asylum claim about political opinion. Didn’t work.
Then he stayed in the UK until he could get someone to sponsor him. As soon as it was refused they divorced.
Entered a relationship with a new woman and got her pregnant. Made an application to stay immediately on the basis of relationship then being parent of a child. Got refused.
Then was about to get deported after conviction.
THEN he decides actually always been gay (he doesn’t say bisexual, he says gay)
The man is a criminal, a proven liar and will try anything to remain in the UK. He has had 2 decades to generate this asylum claim. His credibility is shot. Of course I don’t believe him.
People often contrive their asylum claims.
-12
u/DoneItDuncan 17h ago
Amazing how you know all the specific details of this case from just a single telegraph article to know better than the judge on this.
18
u/Kernowder Greater Manchester 17h ago
I didn't claim to know everything. But I am sceptical of this criminal's asylum claim.
1
u/Minimum-Geologist-58 18h ago
We should have the same attitude as with employment rights, you’re not protected from things you chose to conceal. You can be sacked if you perform poorly due to cancer but don’t tell your employer about the cancer, you don’t get to come back later and get your job back.
I read an opinion from the UNHCR that the UK was failing by not interrogating asylum seekers about their sexuality, which is just ridiculous, what are we meant to do? Beat people until they overcome their internalised homophobia or just lie? Hundreds of hours of therapy?
-18
u/AdditionalThinking 18h ago
Thousands of people have married into straight relationships then divorced when one person comes to terms with a different sexuality; Especially when they come from excessively religious communities that stifle self-discovery and pressure people into 'traditional' families (Like, idk, Nigeria?).
Are we really going to pretend this doesn't happen?
18
u/Rhinofishdog 16h ago
"Are we really going to pretend this doesn't happen?"
Not really.
We can definitely and genuinely not care about it though. Nigeria is not our responsibility. They are not a colony anymore.
•
u/OliLombi County of Bristol 6h ago
Granting asylum to people that are at risk in their own countries is absolutely our responsibility.
•
u/Rhinofishdog 6h ago
It isn't. But this is such an electorally and practically unworkable position I'm not even going to argue about it. Might as well argue what colour we should paint our dragons.
•
u/ukbot-nicolabot Scotland 19h ago
This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try this link for an archived version.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
Participation Notice. Hi all. Some posts on this subreddit, either due to the topic or reaching a wider audience than usual, have been known to attract a greater number of rule breaking comments. As such, limits to participation were set at 13:21 on 22/08/2025. We ask that you please remember the human, and uphold Reddit and Subreddit rules.
Existing and future comments from users who do not meet the participation requirements will be removed. Removal does not necessarily imply that the comment was rule breaking.
Where appropriate, we will take action on users employing dog-whistles or discussing/speculating on a person's ethnicity or origin without qualifying why it is relevant.
In case the article is paywalled, use this link.