SA (Entry clearance application in Jordan – proportionality) Iraq CG  UKAIT 00011
Date of hearing: 7 December 2005
Date Determination notified: 19 January 2006
|Secretary of State for the Home Department||RESPONDENT|
In the light of evidence now available the Tribunal is satisfied that generally it is not disproportionate to a legitimate aim within article 8 (2) to require an Iraqi national to return to Iraq and travel to Jordan to make an application for entry clearance. There is significant further evidence to show that the guidance in KJ (Entry Clearance – Proportionality) Iraq CG  UKIAT 00066 no longer applies.
The hearing before the Immigration Judge
The grounds of application for a review
The error of law
Submissions on whether the appeal should be allowed or dismissed
'A decision taken pursuant to the lawful operation of immigration control will be proportionate in all save a small minority of exceptional cases, identifiable only on a case by case basis.'
Tribunal authorities relating to travelling from Iraq to Jordan to make an application for entry clearance.
Further evidence on travelling from Iraq to Jordan
Consideration of the issues as they relate to the appellant
'17. Mr Hussain argued that the travel dangers referred to by the UNHCR in graphic terms; the appellant's inability to pay to fly; the fact that he is a non-Arab speaking Kurd; that, as a Kurd, he would need to return to Baghdad, then get himself somewhere where he could safely stay until such time as he was able to arrange to travel to Amman; all combine to establish that it would be disproportionate to expect the appellant to return to Iraq in order to apply for entry clearance as a spouse.
18. We are persuaded that Mr Hussain is correct. It is primarily the letter from the UNHCR which has persuaded us of that. The evidence shows that those who fly between Baghdad and Amman are diplomats and businessmen. It is also clear that many of those get to the airport by helicopter from a secure area. The dangers of the road are much more explicit in this correspondence than previously.
19. Mrs Giltrow did not seek to argue that there is any alternative mission to which it would be less hazardous to apply for entry clearance.
20. In our view it cannot be argued that it could be proportionate, in the circumstances which have been set out above, to require the appellant to return to Iraq to apply for entry clearance.'
'... The underlying message of N and Razgar, and of Ullah too, is that the ECHR is neither a surrogate system of asylum nor a fallback for those who have otherwise no right to remain here. It is for particular cases which transcend their class in respects which the Convention recognises.'
Senior Immigration Judge
• Iraq Country Report April 2005
• Letter from FCO 10 March 2004
• Letter from British Embassy Amman 20 March 2005
• Letter from British Embassy Amman 16 June 2005
• Iraq Development Programme re Amman-Erbil flights
• FCO UK Embassies Overseas, Kuwait, Syria, UAE, Turkey.
• FCO Travel Advice 26 July 2005
• British Embassy Baghdad Travel Advice 26 July 2005
• British Embassy Amman Travel Advice 25 July 2005
• Travel Warning US Dept. of State 6 December 2005
• FCO Travel Advice 3 December 2005
• Refugee Council Briefing November 2005
• Radio Free Europe/ Radio Liberty Report 30 November 2005
• British Embassy Baghdad Visa Services Information 3 December 2005
Approved for electronic transmission