Asked by: Peter Bottomley (Conservative - Worthing West)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to the GOLD Group on Operation GIANNA overseeing the Metropolitan Police Department of Professional Standards investigation into allegations in relation to Gurpal Virdi, how many participants in the GOLD Group had the rank or role of (a) Deputy Commissioner, (b) Deputy Assistant Commissioner, (c) Commander, (d) Chief Superintendent, (e) Superintendent, (f) Detective Chief Inspector, (g) Detective Inspector, (h) Detective Sergeant, (i) member of SCD2 Sapphire, (j) member of the Department of Media and Communications and (k) member of the Department of Legal Services; whether representatives of the Crown Prosecution Service were ever present; how many meeting were held; which attendees asked whether there was any evidence that Gurpal Virdi was present at the arrest of the complainant in autumn 1986; which attendees asked whether there was evidence taken from PC Markwick on the arrest for which he was the officer in charge; which attendees asked why evidence was not sought from PC Mady on the arrest of the complainant in spring 1987; what assessment he has made of the equity of the only review of the investigation being conducted by the Department of Professional Standards into its original investigation; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Nick Hurd
Oversight and review of investigations conducted by professional standards departments are operational matters for forces and, where appropriate, the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC). Such decision making is in-dependent of government.
Asked by: Peter Bottomley (Conservative - Worthing West)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, when his Department last returned a person to an overseas country that the individual had not resided in since they were aged four years old or younger.
Answered by Caroline Nokes
Our enforcement policy is founded on the expectation that those with no right to be in the United Kingdom should return home. We expect such persons to leave voluntarily but where they do not, we will seek to enforce their departure.
Individuals may raise Article 8 human rights grounds why they should not be removed from the UK and this must be considered, including their age on arrival in the UK and the length of time spent in the UK if that is part of their claim.
There is a right of appeal against an adverse decision. Returns are only enforced where both the Home Office and the courts are satisfied that an individual has no right to remain in the UK.
Asked by: Peter Bottomley (Conservative - Worthing West)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, at what age and in which year did Kweku Aboboli start his residency in the United Kingdom.
Answered by Caroline Nokes
The Home Office does not comment on individual cases.
Asked by: Peter Bottomley (Conservative - Worthing West)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, for (a) how many months and (b) in which years was Kweku Adoboli resident in Ghana.
Answered by Caroline Nokes
The Home Office does not comment on individual cases.
Asked by: Peter Bottomley (Conservative - Worthing West)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how old Kweku Adoboli was when he left Ghana.
Answered by Caroline Nokes
The Home Office does not comment on individual cases.
Asked by: Peter Bottomley (Conservative - Worthing West)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, in which year was Kwenku Adoboli last resident in Ghana.
Answered by Caroline Nokes
The Home Office does not comment on individual cases.
Asked by: Peter Bottomley (Conservative - Worthing West)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to Stephen Shaw's report entitled Assessment of Government progress in implementing the report on the welfare in detention of vulnerable persons, published in July 2018, what public comment other than his statement of 24 July 2018 he has made on Stephen Shaw's finding that it is disproportionate to deport foreign national offenders who were last resident in their country of origin when very young; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Caroline Nokes
Since the Home Secretary’s statement to Parliament on 24 July, he has made no further public statement about this finding.
As set out in the Immigration Act 2014, Parliament has stated that the deportation of foreign criminals is in the public interest. The more serious the offence committed by a foreign criminal the greater the public interest in a deportation. However, this is subject to the UK’s obligations under the ECHR and the Refugee Convention.
In the case of a foreign national sentenced to a period of imprisonment of at least four years, where the public interest requires deportation unless there are very compelling circumstances, the length of time a person has lived in the UK as well as the strength of their social, cultural and family ties to the UK are all relevant factors taken into account when considering an Article 8 claim.
The Government has no plans to amend the Article 8 public interest considerations approved by Parliament during the passage of the Immigration Act 2014.
Asked by: Peter Bottomley (Conservative - Worthing West)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, when an assessment was (a) first and (b) last made of the danger Kweku Adoboli represents to the United Kingdom.
Answered by Caroline Nokes
The Home Office does not comment on individual cases.
Asked by: Peter Bottomley (Conservative - Worthing West)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what advice his Department has received related to the policy and practice of the removal to another country of a person who last lived there as a young child.
Answered by Caroline Nokes
The deportation of a foreign criminal is subject to the UK’s obligations under the ECHR and the Refugee Convention. Where an Article 8 claim is made, consideration is given to the public interest in deportation to determine if it is outweighed by a foreign criminal’s private or family life. The more serious the offence committed by a foreign criminal the greater the public interest in deportation.
In the case of a foreign criminal sentenced to a period of imprisonment of less than four years, the public interest requires deportation unless the exceptions to deportation, set out in paragraphs 399 and 399A of the Immigration Rules, are met.
In the case of a foreign criminal sentenced to a period of imprisonment of at least four years, the public interest requires deportation except where there are very compelling circumstances.
The Article 8 public interest considerations were approved by Parliament during the passage of the Immigration Act 2014.
Asked by: Peter Bottomley (Conservative - Worthing West)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, how many foreign nationals who have been subject to deportation after release from prison in each of the past eight years had been ordinarily resident in their country of origin since they were aged (a) 4, (b) 5, (c) 6, (d) 7, (e) 8, (f) 9, (g) 10, (h) 11-15 and (i) 16-20.
Answered by Caroline Nokes
Providing the information requested would require a manual check of individual records which could only be done at disproportionate cost.