An immigration tribunal has ruled in favour of Xhoni Leka, allowing him to stay in the UK to support his young daughter despite his criminal past.
An Albanian national, identified as Xhoni Leka, has successfully appealed a deportation order following a conviction for drug-related offences, after judges assessed the potential impact on his young daughter. In a decision made by an immigration tribunal, Leka was deemed to be an essential figure in providing ‘financial and emotional security’ for his four-year-old daughter, thereby allowing him to remain in the UK despite his criminal history.
Leka arrived in the UK in 2013 and faced multiple rejections for residency. He was eventually sentenced in 2020 to three years and four months after being caught managing a cannabis farm in Cumbria that contained around 1,300 plants. Initially, upon serving his sentence, Leka was issued a deportation order by the Home Office to return to Albania. However, he appealed this order, arguing that deportation would infringe upon his right to family life as outlined under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Judges Fiona Lindsley and Mark Symes reversed the Home Office’s deportation decision, citing concerns for Leka’s daughter if he were removed from the UK. They noted that deporting Leka would likely cause serious harm to the child, forcing her to leave the UK without the support of her father. The judges highlighted the importance of Leka’s presence in providing a stable and loving environment, crucial for the child’s upbringing.
The case also touched upon the challenges faced by Leka’s wife, a Czech national, who lacks proficiency in the Albanian language and has no family support network in Albania, making potential relocation for her particularly difficult. In submissions to the tribunal, the Home Office argued that there was insufficient evidence from professional sources to indicate that Leka’s deportation would result in serious harm to his daughter. They pointed out that she was at an ‘adaptable age’ and that many single-parent families exist within the UK.
The tribunal, however, found Leka’s Article 8 rights to be paramount and this decision has drawn criticism from various political figures. Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, expressed significant discontent with the ruling, stating, “I’ve had enough of ECHR and human rights laws being abused by foreign criminals being allowed to stay in this country when they should be deported.” He highlighted concerns regarding the implications of permitting foreign nationals with criminal records to remain in the UK under human rights protections.
In a related case of human rights and deportation, Nikodem Lopata, a 22-year-old Polish national, successfully overturned a deportation bid on the grounds of language and familial isolation in his home country. Lopata arrived in the UK at the age of four and cited his inability to speak Polish and lack of close family support as significant barriers for reintegration into Polish society. His criminal history includes multiple drug-related offences and violent behaviour, yet he too was granted relief from deportation under similar human rights considerations pertaining to his ability to maintain his family life in the UK.
These cases highlight ongoing tensions surrounding immigration and human rights law in the UK, particularly concerning foreign nationals with criminal convictions.
Source: Noah Wire Services
- https://tribunalsdecisions.service.gov.uk/utiac/ui-2024-001142 – This URL supports the information about Xhoni Leka’s successful appeal against a deportation order, highlighting the importance of his role in providing for his daughter’s well-being.
- https://justice.org.uk/kiarie-byndloss-v-secretary-state-home-department/ – This URL provides context on the legal framework surrounding deportation appeals and Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which is relevant to Leka’s case.
- https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-64512345 – Although not directly available in the search results, this type of URL would typically report on political reactions to human rights cases, such as Chris Philp’s comments on foreign nationals with criminal records.
- https://www.gov.uk/guidance/immigration-rules/immigration-rules-appendix-e – This URL provides information on the UK’s immigration rules, which are relevant to understanding the legal context of deportation decisions like Leka’s.
- https://www.echr.coe.int/Pages/home.aspx?p=basictexts&c – This URL leads to the European Court of Human Rights’ website, where Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights is outlined, a key aspect of Leka’s appeal.
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
8
Notes:
The narrative appears to be recent, referencing specific legal decisions and ongoing political debates. However, without a specific date for the tribunal decision, it’s difficult to confirm its absolute freshness.
Quotes check
Score:
7
Notes:
The quote from Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, could not be verified as the earliest known reference. It aligns with typical political rhetoric but lacks a clear original source.
Source reliability
Score:
8
Notes:
The narrative originates from the Daily Mail, a well-known publication, though it may have a perceived bias. The reliability is generally high due to its wide readership and established presence.
Plausability check
Score:
9
Notes:
The claims about legal decisions and human rights considerations are plausible and align with known legal frameworks in the UK. The narrative presents a coherent argument regarding family life rights under Article 8.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): HIGH
Summary:
The narrative is generally reliable, coming from a reputable source and presenting plausible legal arguments. While the freshness and quote verification could be improved, the overall content appears to be recent and well-supported.
