Immigration judge under scrutiny after tribunal confirms he is failing to meet standards

‘Immigration judge under scrutiny after tribunal confirms he is failing to meet standards’ is a blog written by Gherson Immigration on the 9th October 2017. Having previously read a Blog from Gherson Immigration and really enjoyed it, I have decided to look at another. After having read the first few lines I was intrigued to find out more so I read further..

This blog speaks about the immigration judge which has been found to be failing to meet his duties and having lack of knowledge of the requirement of the immigration rules.

The judge is called Majid. He is blind and works with an assistant, however, though the Upper Tribunal accepted that this would restrict him from conducting complex matters in writing at short notice, his disability should not impair his ability to apply the law together with his reasoned conclusion.

After having carried out several examinations on judge Majid to test his ability in his current job, it has come to conclusion that he is ‘’wholly failing to meet the standards that are demanded by the office of a judge and expected by the parties’’.

There has been several appeals against Judge Majid’s decisions as he did not provide sufficient informed reasons for his given decisions, and due to this, parties have been left uncertain of the reasons of the outcome of their matter.

After having examined the appeals against judge Majid, it appeared clear that not only did he know the basic principles of the immigration rules and not the relevant requirement for each specific application, but he also did not seem to have full understanding of his own powers as a judge. The basic principles of the immigration rules in which he has listed have also often appeared to be wrong.

Further, for the reasons set out in the individuals decisions of each of the 13 cases which Judge Majid was responsible for, each of the 13 appeals have been remitted to the First Tier Tribunal to be re-heard before an unconnected judge.

Reading this blog, I was put into lots of different emotions. I at some points sympathised with Judge Majid because I feel like if he was able to do his job properly then he defiantly would not be making these mistakes deliberately. This may well be down to the lack of training or lack of support that he gets alongside him as he needs it more than any other judge due to his disability.

However, I also felt upset and angry for the unclear decisions made and fed back to the applicants, or wrong decisions I should say. Individuals are required to wait for a very long time until they receive a hearing date, this pause whilst waiting for that date is very stressful and make lots of people very ill as it puts their whole life on hold, therefore I feel that when they do receive their decision, that should at least be clear and relevant to each individual, not generic facts, which also most of the time have appeared to be wrong. The UK is meant to be very ‘Human Rights’ orientated, though I feel that is not actually the case, because if so then appeals should be taken very seriously, but the facts that there has been room for mistakes in such situations, even if not deliberate, is very poor and needs to be seriously looked into with a very sincere apology given to each applicant too.

I don’t feel that this blog has really developed my law terminology because it is very basic and straight to the point. However, this did mean that it was very easy to understand, and not too lengthy so I was able to read it all in one go and avoid taking breaks in-between as I was able to take all the information in immediately.

There wasn’t much information to back up what the blog had said. Perhaps having some photographs would have made it appear more appealing and also having more information about certain specific immigration rules would have also helped the reader understand and engage more with what is being said.

https://www.gherson.com/blog/immigration-judge-scrutiny

 

 

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *