Litigaton Update: Judges dismiss HRW statement as 'leaving much to be desired in terms of quality'

By TAG, Tuesday, February 28 2012
In the continuing dispute of fact between the UK Border Agency and NGOs on the seriousness of returnee torture, UK judges pre-emptively dismiss NGO claims as 'not of sufficiently high quality' in 'X v SSHD' . X v SSHD was before the court on other grounds before the HRW report came out but both parties included the HRW report of Friday in their papers on Monday. The Judges focused on the HRW report in their decision.
 
This pre-empts the arguments in the TAG sponsored grounds on risk of torture citing 3 NGOs: HRW, FFT and Act Now. Counsel who drafted the TAG sponsored grounds  were not notified of the oral hearing in 'X' yesterday and have appealed stating procedural unfairness, in that UKBA were allowed to make oral representations and submit documents leading to a determination on issues critical to them (the HRW report) without their being allowed to respond. 

Appeals to the Court of Appeal are being lodged.


Here are the judges comments in X v SSHD on recent NGOs statements calling for a halt to returns to Sri Lanka