Woman wins £100k for ‘being treated like criminal’ after overstaying visa

An asylum seeker from Pakistan was awarded compensation of nearly £100,000 after claiming she was “treated like a criminal” after overstaying her student visa.

Nadra Almas argued that as a Christian she faced persecution in Pakistan as part of her 16-year court battle to remain in the UK.

Born in Pakistan, Ms Almas arrived in the UK in 2004 on a student visa, which a judge heard had expired after five months. She was served a notice of removal in 2008 and made six bids to remain between 2005 and 2014.

The High Court heard Ms Almas was handcuffed by Home Office officials who detained her in 2018 and told her she would be deported. She was released two weeks later, according to the Telegraph.

The same publication reports Ms Almas was granted refugee status by the Government nearly three years later. Over that period, she wasn’t allowed to travel, work or claim benefits.

Ms Almas was awarded compensation after claiming the way she was treated had breached her human rights and her self-esteem had been “undermined” by having to rely on family and friends.

The Government appealed a judge’s decision to compensate Ms Almas with the award of £98,757 in damages, but the appeal was dismissed by another judge who upheld the findings and amount awarded.

The court found “numerous” breaches in how Ms Almas was detained at the Yarl’s Wood detention centre. These included failing to consider alternatives to keeping her locked up.

Home Office officials took two years and nine months to approve her refugee status, a delay which Recorder McNeill ruled had breached her right to a family life.

The judge found Ms Almas was “wholly unable” to work and her home life was affected by the anxiety she felt after her period of detention, feeling “like a criminal” and “not a good person with her friends and family” because she had been detained.

The judge is quoted by the Telegraph as describing flaws in Ms Almas’s detention as “outrageous”, showing a “reckless” disregard for her human rights.

Both Recorder McNeill’s findings and the level of compensation were appealed against by the Home Office, but Mr Justice Ritchie rejected its case.

He said the damages were appropriate and Recorder McNeill’s rulings on unlawful detention were “logical” and supported by the evidence.

Mr Justice Ritchie said: “These breaches were not trivial or minor.”