A convicted Ghanaian criminal deported from Britain 12 years ago has been allowed to return under human rights laws because separation from his family left him depressed.
An immigration tribunal led by Judge Abid Mahmood ruled that Samuel Frimpong should be allowed to come back to Britain – despite having been jailed and deported in 2013 for attempting to “circumvent” the Home Office’s leave to remain rules.
The judge said deporting him was an “unjustifiable interference” with his rights to a family life under article eight of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Frimpong was convicted in 2008, with his children – now aged 11 and 15 – born after his conviction.
Frimpong was jailed and deported in 2013 for attempting to ‘circumvent’ the Home Office’s leave to remain rules
PA
His appeal to revoke the deportation order was initially rejected by a first-tier immigration tribunal.
However, Mahmood later reversed this decision at an upper tribunal hearing.
The tribunal was told Frimpong had lived a “depressive life” away from his family, while his children had found it “difficult to explain” where their father was to school friends.
They felt “socially isolated” as a result of his absence, the hearing was told.
His wife, meanwhile, said the children “keep begging their father to come to England and always pray for his safe return.”
She said she couldn’t work full-time while caring for the children, while the family couldn’t afford to travel to Ghana.
MORE LIKE THIS:
Judge Abid Mahmood said the fraudster deserved a right to a family life under the controversial ECHR
NO5 BARRISTERS’ CHAMBERS
Judge Mahmood concluded: “Despite the very heavy weight to be afforded to the public interest and the presumption of deportation, the [Home Office’s] refusal to revoke the deportation order… amounts to an unjustifiable interference with the Article 8 rights of [Frimpong], his partner and his two children.”
The judge said it would be “insurmountable” for the children to move to Ghana, separated from friends and living in a one-room home.
“Modern means of communication have been tried in this case and have failed,” he noted.
On Frimpong’s criminality, the judge cited a probation report which said he posed “no risk” to others and had not reoffended since 2008.
