The Bangladeshi national – referred to in court documents as ‘A’ – claims that his membership of the Bangladesh National Party put him at risk of persecution from the Awami League – which is currently in power in the Asian country.
He left Bangladesh in 2012 on a student visa for the UK but feared returning, so he remained in the British Isles – ultimately being arrested in Jersey in August 2017.
His asylum request was initially rejected by former Assistant Home Affairs Minister Deidre Mezbourian in January 2018 before being rejected again by Home Affairs Minister Len Norman in August last year.
In court documents, the Deputy Bailiff, Tim Le Cocq, said: ‘His asylum application was based on his having been a member of the Bangladesh National Party, which was and is in opposition to the Awami League, who are currently in power in Bangladesh.
‘The applicant alleges that Awami has victimised those who oppose it, including members of the BNP, and that the security services in Bangladesh are complicit in such victimisation, which extends to the murder of political opponents.
‘The applicant states that he had attended two demonstrations organised by the BNP in 2007 and 2008 at which there had been violence and following which he, together with others, had been falsely charged with offences.’
It is being argued that by refusing his asylum application and returning him to Bangladesh, Jersey would be in breach of the Geneva Convention on Human Rights, which protects a person’s right to life and liberty.
Last December, a Syrian national – dubbed ‘X’ in court documents – who fears his life is at risk from Islamic State terrorists was also granted the right to appeal against his deportation from the Island. The man, who arrived at Anne Port by dinghy in August, will be allowed to stay in Jersey until the Royal Court decides whether to allow his asylum request.
Under Jersey’s immigration rules, an asylum seeker can be granted refugee status in Jersey if the Home Affairs Minister believes that ‘refusing his application would result in the applicant being required to go in breach of the Geneva Convention, to a country in which his life or freedom would be threatened on account of his race, religion, nationality, political opinion or membership of a particular social group’.
