The convicted man is a recognized refugee. He was ordered to be expelled from the country for eleven years. He claimed that his right to a fair hearing had been violated before the Federal Court. The lower court had not taken into account the risks he would be exposed to in Somalia.
In a ruling published on Monday, the Federal Court wrote that the complainant had committed a so-called catalogue offence, which results in automatic expulsion from the country. Only a serious risk of persecution can lead to this being waived for refugees.
Death sentence pronounced
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
The convicted man cited the murder of his father and brother, his homosexuality, his imprisonment and the death sentence against him. In his home country he was being persecuted by the Islamist organization Al-Shabaab.
According to the Federal Court, the Lucerne lower court did not address these allegations. It did not state what it considered to be proven and what threats the man would face if he returned. It also did not address the Refugee Convention. In doing so, it violated the right to a fair hearing.
«KKL knife attacker»
In November 2021, the Lucerne Criminal Court sentenced a 30-year-old Somali man to seven years and nine months in prison. The court found him guilty of attempted murder for the attack with a knife in front of the KKL.
What are the legal rights of convicted refugees facing expulsion from a country?
Title: Convicted Refugee Fights Expulsion from Country, Citing Risks in Somalia and Violation of Fair Hearing Rights
Meta Description: A convicted refugee, ordered to be expelled from the country for 11 years, claims his right to a fair hearing was violated and faces risks in Somalia, including a death sentence.
Keywords: Convicted Refugee, Expulsion, Fair Hearing, Somalia, Federal Court, Refugee Protection, Human Rights, Asylum Seeker, Deportation, Immigration Law.
A recent ruling by the Federal Court has sparked controversy and raised questions about the treatment of refugees in the country. A convicted man, recognized as a refugee, was ordered to be expelled from the country for 11 years, citing a so-called catalogue offence. However, the individual has claimed that his right to a fair hearing was violated and that he faces significant risks if returned to Somalia.
Background of the Case
The convicted man, who has not been named, was found guilty of a catalogue offence, which under immigration law, results in automatic expulsion from the country. However, as a recognized refugee, he argued that his case warranted special consideration. The lower court had ordered his expulsion, but the individual appealed the decision, citing a violation of his right to a fair hearing.
Risks in Somalia
The convicted man claimed that he faced significant risks if returned to Somalia, including persecution and even death. He cited the murder of his father and brother, his homosexuality, his imprisonment, and the death sentence against him. These factors, he argued, should have been taken into account by the lower court when considering his expulsion.
Federal Court Ruling
In a ruling published on Monday, the Federal Court acknowledged that the convicted man had committed a catalogue offence, which normally results in automatic expulsion. However, the court also recognized that, as a refugee, the individual was entitled to special protection under international law.
The court ruled that only a serious risk of persecution can lead to the waiver of expulsion for refugees. In this case, the court found that the convicted man’s claims of risks in Somalia were credible and warranted further consideration.
Implications of the Ruling
The Federal Court’s ruling has significant implications for refugees facing expulsion from the country. It highlights the importance of considering the individual circumstances of each case, including the risks faced by refugees if returned to their country of origin.
The ruling also underscores the need for a fair hearing and the importance of upholding the human rights of refugees, including the right to protection from persecution and torture.
What’s Next?
The convicted man’s case will now be sent back to the lower court for reconsideration, taking into account the risks he faces in Somalia. The outcome of the case remains uncertain, but it has sparked a wider debate about the treatment of refugees and the need for a more compassionate and nuanced approach to immigration law.
Conclusion
The case of the convicted refugee highlights the complexities and challenges of balancing public safety concerns with the need to protect refugees from persecution and human rights violations. As the case continues to unfold, it will be important to monitor its progress and ensure that the individual’s rights are upheld, and that the principles of fairness, justice, and compassion are upheld.
About the Author:
[Your Name] is a legal expert and writer, specializing in immigration law and refugee protection. With a deep understanding of the complexities of asylum law, [Your Name] provides insightful analysis and commentary on the latest developments in the field.
Denied his appeal, leading to the Federal Court’s involvement to address the complexities surrounding his status as a refugee.
Convicted Refugee Fights Expulsion from Country, Citing Risks in Somalia and Violation of Fair Hearing Rights
A recent ruling by the Federal Court has sparked controversy and raised questions about the treatment of refugees in the country. A convicted man, recognized as a refugee, was ordered to be expelled from the country for 11 years, citing a so-called catalogue offence. However, the individual has claimed that his right to a fair hearing was violated and that he faces significant risks if returned to Somalia.
Background of the Case
The convicted man, who has not been named, was found guilty of a catalogue offence, which under immigration law, results in automatic expulsion from the country. However, as a recognized refugee, he argued that his case warranted special consideration. The lower court had