Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Lawyers of refugees who were wrongly jailed criticised by Appeal Court

 

Paul Peachey
Tuesday 30 July 2013 14:52 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

The Appeal Court has criticised the lawyers of five refugees who were wrongly jailed for carrying false documents after fleeing their countries under the threat of persecution.

It was “surprising and disturbing” that their legal teams did not know there was a valid defence to protect those in fear of losing their lives or freedom, three judges ruled.

The five - who included a husband and wife - were jailed for between six months and a year after being found to be carrying false papers after arriving in Britain.

They included a Congolese man who faced death threats for his political stance and an Iranian couple arrested in 2012 as they tried to reach Canada because they feared imprisonment and ill-treatment.

“It is both surprising and disturbing that neither solicitors nor counsel appear to have been aware of the position in law and we repeat that this situation should not recur in the future,” said Lord Justice Leveson in a written ruling.

Prosecutors said they would not appeal against the ruling. Ben Douglas-Jones, junior counsel for the prosecution, said: “He (Leveson) has made it clear that he wants to kill this issue stone dead.”

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in