A further hearing is to be organised following the man’s successful challenge.
The man was detained in connection to the 2019 Easter Sunday bombings (Image: Getty)
A Sri Lankan national who faced arrest on suspicion of being part of a bomb attack that killed 269 people has won an appeal over their asylum in the UK. The man, who is referred to as “YA” during proceedings, came out on top at an immigration Upper Tribunal in Birmingham after challenging the Home Office’s initial decision. On Easter Sunday in 2019, six suicide bombings hit Catholic churches and high-end hotels in Sri Lanka. The perpetrators were identified as being part of the NTJ (National Thowheeth Jama’ath, a group of domestic religious extremists, who Islamic State (IS) claimed as their own.
The man’s case will now face another hearing after the latest development. The asylum seeker entered the UK in 2022 with his wife, alleging that they face persecution at home. Before they left Sri Lanka, authorities had detained him. He purported that original proceedings brought against him were unfair.
The Home Office refused asylum in the first instance (Image: Getty)
This lead to the tribunal exploring potential procedural flaws.
The Government had found that YA did not qualify for asylum in Britain before he challenged the verdict, GB News reports.
However, Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge Claire Burns cited multiple legal errors in the initial judgement, including an apparent failure to consider evidence of the man’s release on bail following his arrest warrant.
Previous judges were also allegedly “highly prejudiced” against him.
The case is therefore to be reexamined.
Judge Burns said: “I find there will need to be a complete rehearing wherein the Judge will make findings about the credibility of [the applicant’s] account and given the nature and extent of the fact finding the appeal should therefore be remitted to the First-tier Tribunal.”
“I determine that no facts should be preserved,” she added.
“This will enable the new Tribunal to make a full assessment on the credibility of [YA’s] account on full consideration of the oral and documentary evidence.”
