Sincere Thanks To All UK Citizens and Government Officials Who Have Supported Us So Far, Including: Jack Straw - Minister of Justice, Lord Mackie of Benshie, Sir Philip Cohen, Professor Ian Shanks FRSFREng, Mike Weir MP, Councillor Donald Morrison (Arbroath), Councillor Rob Merson (Aberdeen), Councillor Rev Ewan Aitken (Edinburgh), Councillor Gordon Wallace (Glasgow) & the dozens of Scottish Councillors from all over Scotland.
The Home Office refused my wife's application for "Indefinite Leave To Remain" visa in June 2008.
Despite the fact that:
:: We want, and expect, nothing from the UK tax payers
:: I am 100% native British (Scottish)
:: I have my own business, own my house, and I am financially secure
:: Simon, the son of Sir Philip Cohen, is a close family friend, a witness that our marriage is genuine
:: He knows both of us well, and has been to our home many times
:: The Home Office lost some of the documents we sent them, but they have denied it
:: My cousin's husband worked for IND Croydon and confirms they often LOST documents!!!
:: The Home Office claimed we didn't send the "Life in the UK" pass certificate
:: After "the ILR refusal" they later admitted they know she had passed the "Life in the UK" test!!!
:: The Home Office sent a letter stating we could get 'Further Leave To Remain'. Too late to apply for it!
:: They charged a RIP-OFF fee of £750 for the application
:: My wife attended UK universities full-time from 1995 to 2006 ~ Achieved Doctorate
:: I pay £1000's in taxes to this Government each year
:: THIS CASE SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED FOR GROSS MALADMINISTRATION
Please read our story below the Sign Our Petition section...
Your email and address will not be published, and is collected
only to confirm your support for my wife to MPs & Government officials.
This petition is to support Mrs Mabroka Mackins against the Home Office refusal of her visa. By signing you are showing you support us, and strongly believe that she should be granted "Indefinite Leave To
Remain" by the Home Office. You must be a British Citizen or Resident to sign our petition.
Jack Straw MP - Minister of Justice
the only decent member of the Labour government who listened and answered us.
The only one who has had the human decency to listen to us and apologised for how the UK Home Office have treated us.
Who Ignored Us?
Gordon Brown PM
Jacqui Smith MP - Home Office
Liam Byrne MP - Home Office
Ignored over 1200 faxes, letters and emails from us and our supporters detailing the injustice done to us.
The Home Office - London refused my wife the ILR visa because of their own incompetence. We sent her "Life in the UK" pass certificate which they claimed we didn't send, so they requested we send it! We wrote back to Mrs Zaderabast (HO) stating that this had already been sent, we got no answer to our response to them, we then got the REFUSAL. We later got a letter from them stating they know my wife passed the "Life in the UK" test. WHY then did they request this certificate if they knew she had passed it?
Utter HOME OFFICE Incompetence...
My cousin's husband Matt Gibson worked in the IND CROYDON department and told us documents were constantly being lost by senior members of staff during the whole period he worked there!!! They have caused us huge pain due to their lies!
Apology from United Kingdom Border Agency ~ 1st august 2008
Following our letter to Jack Straw
Scotland and Northern Ireland Region
Festival Court 3
200 Brand Street
Glasgow G51 1DH
Tel +44 (0)141 555 1504 Fax +44 (0)141 555 1561
Our ref: B1038*** 30 July 2008
Dear Mr Mackins,
Thank you for your letter of 2 July 2008 addressed to Mr Jack Straw, Minister of Justice, which has been passed to me to reply.
Firstly, I would like to acknowledge the difficult position in which you and your wife appear to have been placed by the decisions made, within the law as it stands, by this department. It is our normal practice, where possible to advise those who are issued with a probationary Spouse visa, that at the end of the 24 month period, they will need to produce evidence of co-habitation. Unfortunately this did not happen in your case, for which I apologise.
In addition I would like to acknowledge, it might have been sensible to have considered granting your wife a further period of limited leave, as you suggest, to allow you time to collect suitable evidence of your ongoing marriage.
I note that since writing to Mr Straw your wife has withdrawn her appeal against the decision to refuse her settlement in the United Kingdom. I understand this is because she had to urgently leave the country.
If she is currently out of the country she should seek Entry Clearance before returning. I can give no guarantees as to any decisions made by the Entry Clearance Officer on such a matter, but I have undertaken to note our systems that a sympathetic view should be taken regarding the previous refusal and withdrawn appeal.
If your wife remains in the United Kingdom a further application for Settlement would receive careful consideration particularly bearing in mind recent Case Law relating to the application of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
May I conclude by apologising for what appears to have been an inflexible and insensitive application of the Immigration Rules in your wife's case and I hope that we can now bring matters to a satisfactory conclusion.
Yours sincerely,
Pam Moore
Senior Caseworker
Scotland and Northern Ireland Region, United Kingdom Border Agency
The Home Office refused my wife's application for "Indefinite Leave To Remain" visa in June 2008.
Despite the fact that:
:: We want, and expect, nothing from the UK tax payers
:: I am 100% native British (Scottish)
:: I have my own business and house, and I am financially secure
:: Simon, the son of Sir Philip Cohen, is a close family friend, a witness that our marriage is genuine
:: He knows both of us well, and has been to our home many times
:: The Home Office sent a letter stating we could get 'Further Leave To Remain'. Too late to apply for it!
:: They lost some of the documents we sent them, but have denied it
:: My wife attended UK universities full-time from 1995 to 2006 ~ Achieved Doctorate
:: I pay £1000's in taxes to this Government each year
If the Home Office had sent a letter dated 31st of March 2008 in time to our MP Mike Weir, who didn't get until the 10th of April 2008 for some reason, we would have known that we could have applied for the FLR (further leave to remain visa) and got it. Our Marriage Visa expired on the 10th of April 2008, so by the time we got the letters from our MP which stated "Mrs Mackins can apply for further leave to remain", and the Home Office response to him saying the same, it was already two days too late for us to apply. As we hadn't received a reply, we naively applied for ILR (Indefinite Leave To Remain) some days earlier.
We were then refused the ILR because they lost some of our documents, and apparently, we didn't have enough letters with my wife's name and address on them, even though we sent at least 20 personally addressed to my wife, including her bank account statements for the whole period. We later found out that they want household bills with joint names on them, we obviously didn't know this. All the bills are in my name, which I didn't realise was a potential problem until they refused us.
A few weeks after applying and paying the extortionate £750 fee for ILR, they sent a letter asking for numerous documents which they had already been given to them, or were not relevant to us. Which should have been apparent if they had actually read our application. So, I immediately contacted my MP Mike Weir to complain. We both wrote to them, as it was obvious from what they were asking for, they hadn't read our application. I have never received any reply from them, then we got the "Visa Application Refused" letter some weeks later.
They ignored our response to their requested items letter, lost some of our documents, including "Life in the UK" pass certificate, and Simon Cohen's witness letter stating he knows both of us well. My MP Mike Weir (Arbroath) contacted them over maladministration of our case, weeks before my wife's visa was refused, but it appears they insist they didn't lose them.
I asked the Home Office for a one year FLR "Further Leave To Remain" extension to our marriage visa, to change the household bills to joint names, collect them and apply again. The Home Office said 'NO', they said we should have applied before our Marriage Visa had expired on the 10th of April.
It was entirely their fault that we found out too late we could apply for FLR, as they sent the letter to our MP stating this fact TEN DAYS after its stated date of 31st March. Because they held onto the letter before sending, we obviously got it too late to apply. What kind of work ethics do these people operate under?
I find their methods for determining who is genuine married couple, totally unreliable and pathetic. People who really have 'scam' marriages obviously know the system, so they are the ones who are unaffected by it. It is the genuine married couples, who are naive, as we were, who get hit by this.
The Home Office are the most unfair, unethical and obstinate organisation I have ever experienced. I see foreign men with foreign wives living all over Scotland. Yet I, a Scottish person, am being subjected to this immoral and unjust Westminster bureaucracy, just because I want my wife to be allowed to live with me, in my own country.
Surely, all that really matters is that I pay to support my wife and ask nothing from the state, while she is in the UK.
Had they the basic human decency and common sense to grant the one year extension, this would have satisfied their refusal reason, without; threatening my wife with deportation, and affecting my business through constant stress, and time wasted, because I am forced to campaign against this ridiculous decision.
They threatened to deport my wife and make her apply again from overseas, which shows how pathetic and immoral this system is. Any decent and reasonable person looking at our case and circumstances, would quickly see how simple this is to resolve. She is my wife, we take/need nothing from the state, we were legally married in Scotland!
If you are a Councillor for any political party in the UK and have received my email regarding Home Office Immigration Officer Abuses, please send me full details of any abuse suffered by any of you constituents and ask them to contact me directly.
If you work for the Home Office and would like to inform us about abuses you know about by any UK Immigration Officers, PLEASE email us.
Confidentiality guaranteed.
15th July 2008
My wife was forced to leave the UK on the 15th July 2008 without a visa to return to me due to my wife's uncle and aunt being killed, and two of their children injured, in a car crash on the 30th of June 2008, and my wife's mother being ill at this time. She has applied for a settlement visa from her home country to come back to me. We have been told there is a 13 week waiting list for visa applications!
This still doesn't change the fact that The Home Office and several MPs ignored our plea for someone to look at the INJUSTICE of our situation prior to her having to return home urgently. We were in the process of appealing to the Immigration Tribunal in Glasgow, but had to drop our case because my wife needed to go home urgently. My wife wanted to return home as soon as we heard about the accident, but our fears of being kept apart because she would have to go back with no visa delayed our decision. Then when she also heard her mother was ill, she had to go.
Have just received an email from my wife 19th July 2008 saying she has handed her settlement visa application into the Visa Application Centre in Tripoli and paid yet another fee, of £560. With the ILR fee of £750, this is a total of £1,310 in fees to this government in the last 3 months, just for the right to have my wife to be allowed to live with me in Scotland. They have told her it will take 13 weeks for them to make a decision on her settlement visa application! This immigration system is immoral, why do we now have to wait 13 weeks for them to make a decision?
How much more 'Westminster' bureaucracy do we have to take before they allow us to live in peace together again as husband and wife, here in Scotland?
If my wife is not treated with respect by these government departments, I will close my business down, and sell my house (which is already up for sale because of this) to leave this country, to join her somewhere abroad where we are both welcome. I will not continue to pay £1000's a year in taxes to a Government that has destroyed my family.
5th July 2008 - Just got a letter from the Home Office stating "I can assure you that all the documents we received were copied and returned together with the refusal letter". I can assure them THIS IS NOT TRUE, because they returned at least 12 less, than were actually sent. Our MP is still waiting for an answer to why the letter the Home Office sent him stating that we could apply for FLR, which was dated 31st of March, did not get to him until the 10th April.
Why would we complain to our MP before we sent in our visa application, about the rip-off £750 fee, and my wife being forced to sit the "Life in the UK" test, when she had been at UK universities for over 10 years, and has excellent written and oral English, but was still forced to pay for and take the test, PASS it, then NOT send it?
They did lose some of our documents!
My wife, and Simon Cohen, a witness, saw me count the documents into the envelope, and specifically remembers the 'Life in the UK certificate', because I was complaining strongly at the time about my wife being forced to sit this test, despite her having an excellent level of English because of her years at UK Universities. On the day we sent the application, he brought us a letter that he had signed, stating he has know both of us for years, as he visits us often.
This was also lost and not returned.
My cousin Jenny's husband, Matt G., worked for IND - Immigration and Nationality Directorate in Croydon. He told us papers were often lost, frequently by senior staff, all the time he worked there. Their statement implying that they didn't lose anything, is false. These administration errors cause huge upset to the lives of families like ours, they don't even have the human decency to admit they 'may' have lost them.
My closest friend is Simon Cohen, the son of Sir Philip Cohen. He has endorsed our petition. He has known my wife and I for years, and has visited our home constantly. He can verify that we are a genuine married couple, and that our relationship has been constant since we met, before we were married.
We have a letter, signed by him, stating this fact. We sent this letter from Mr Cohen to the Home Office and several MPs, but none of them have ever responded. Our application was refused because they were unsure if we were a genuine married couple. Yet, this was blatant proof of our relationship from a witness, a respected UK citizen, but apparently ignored.
I even asked our MP to suggest to the Home Office a CONDITIONAL "Indefinite Leave To Remain" visa.
Where we would be most willing for the Home Office to telephone us whenever they like, any time in the future, day or night, to tell us to drive to a local Police Station to prove without doubt, that we are a genuine married couple, who are living together. This request negates their argument to refuse us the visa, but will probably be disregarded. Even though our suggestion is far more powerful as a method of proof, than having a wife's name and address on household bills.
Anyone could easily get any person's name on their bills, whether a marriage was an immigration scam, or genuine, and whether the 'wife' was, or wasn't, living at the listed address. This letters/bills method is totally unreliable, and should be replaced by occasional random visits by a Social Worker or Police, or even phone calls to the family home by the Home Office, to see if couples really are living there together.
Whether the Home Office admit to losing some of our documents, and asking for documents which were not relevant to us, or, we didn't send the 'correct' type of documents, because we thought Bank Account statements and the others we sent were good as proof, this was very simple to correct, had they the will and human decency to do so. All they had to do was give us a 1 year extension to collect the 'household bills' with joint names on.
It was obvious from my Business Account, and Business Reserve Account statements provided, that I run my own business, and am self-employed. And, my wife had stated in the application letter that she is not working, so why ask us for letters from our employers? I wrote back explaining that we had already sent some of the documents they were asking for, and pointed out that we were obviously not employed, so asked them why they had asked for letters from employers?
We never did get an answer to this.
25th June 2008
I was told to call and ask the Home Office for a one year extension to our Marriage Visa, to change the household bills to show both our names, then to apply again. But the UK Home Office said "NO". They said that because our Marriage Visa expired 10th of April we cannot have an extension! Had they sent the letter dated 31st March in time, to our MP, we would have known we could apply for it!
Had they the decency to give the one year extension, it would have resolved the whole situation easily, without putting my wife, and I, through extreme stress, and the threat of deportation. I had no idea that we were supposed to be collecting household bills as proof of living together, and that we should have had both our names on them. If I had known this, it was a very simple thing to do, and we would have obviously had done this.
When I phoned them, they said that it is highly likely she will be deported, and have to apply to come back here from her own country. Based on our circumstances, this is ridiculous, unjust and immoral.
Surely our immigration system should deal with people on a case by case basis, and process them in a decent, sensitive, and reasonable manner. My wife is NOT an illegal immigrant, and I pay taxes to these people, we take nothing from the state.
We the undersigned support Mrs Mackins against the Home Office refusal of her visa.
We support and strongly believe that she should be granted "Indefinite Leave To
Remain" by the Home Office.
 | Lord Mackie Of Benshie - London |
| | Professor Sir Philip Cohen FRSFRSE - Dundee |
| | Professor Ian Shanks FRSFREng - Dundee |
| | Simon Cohen - Dundee |
| | Councillor Donald Morrison - Forfar |
| | Councillor Rob Merson - Ellon |
| | Councillor Fraser Macpherson - Dundee |
| | Councillor James G S Black - Dundee |
| | Councillor Rev Ewan Aitken - Edinburgh |
| | Councillor Ronald Cairns - Edinburgh |
| | Councillor Ken Guild - Dundee |
| | Councillor Donald Wilson - Edinburgh |
| | Councillor Gordon Buchan - Edinburgh |
| | Councillor Vivien Dance - Clynder |
| | Councillor Bob Band - Perth |
| | Councillor Alan Grant - Blairgowrie |
| | Councillor Donald Macdonald - Oban |
| | Councillor Neil Cooney - Aberdeen |
| | Councillor Graeme Clark - Banchory |
| | Councillor Bryan Stuart - Insch |
| | Councillor Archie Dryburgh - Annan |
| | Councillor Ian Gray - Portsoy |
| | Councillor Gordon Chalmers, Argyll And Bute Council - Tobermory |
| | Councillor Kevin Stewart - Aberdeen |
| | Councillor Jean Dick - Laurencekirk |
| | Councillor Christina Roberts - Dundee |
| | Councillor Jim Swift - Giffnock |
| | Councillor Stewart Miller - Clarkston |
| | Councillor Jim Gibbons (East Dunbartonshire) - Milngavie |
| | Councillor John Williamson - Mussselburgh |
| | Councillor Judy Hamilton - Kirkcaldy |
| | Councillor Bobby Clelland - Dunfermline |
| | Councillor Alfred Patey - Glenrothes |
| | Councillor Gordon Wallace - Glasgow |
| | Councillor Arthur Robertson - Methil |
| | Councillor Robin Waterston - St. Andrews |
| | Councillor Dave Herbert - Dalgety Bay |
| | Councillor David Macdiarmid - Falkland |
| | Councillor Allan Hendry (SNP) - Aberdeenshire |
| | Councillor Sandy Duncan - Turriff |
| | Councillor Katie Moffat - Midlothian |
| | Councillor Brian Goodall - Dunfermline |
| | Councillor Eddie Phillips - Barrhead |
| | Stuart Urquhart - Wormit |
| | Helen Mackins - Coatbridge |
| | Natalie Mackins - Maryport |
| | Samantha Mackins - Maryport |
| | Stephen Mackins - Maryport |
| | John Mackins - Birchington |
| | Chris Mackins - Carlisle |
| | Emily Beal - Leicester |
| | Jane Smith - Coatbridge |
| | Billy Smith - Coatbridge |
| | Grace O'Hagen - Coatbridge |
| | Ronald T McAvoy - Maryport |
| | Sarah Jane Mackins - Maryport |
| | Kenny Barclay - Penrith |
| | Scott Gates - Bunessan |
| | Andrew Morgan - Merthyr Tydfil |
| | Usman Dantata - London |
| | Jennifer Valerie Gibson - Durham |
| | Matthew Gibson - Durham |
| | James Davey - London |
| | Danny Moore - Edinburgh |
| | Paul Partridge - Bridgend |
| | Yvonne Carmichael - Ballater |
| | Alastair Carmichael - Ballater |
| | James Yule - St Andrews |
| | Brian Kerr - Birmingham |
| | Annette Mackins - Carlisle |
| | Cliff Mallon - Dundee |
| | Graham Weir - Monifieth |
| | Russell Dalton - Dundee |
| | Anne Dalton - Dundee |
| | Christina Mackins - High Wycombe |
| | Mark Crabtree - High Wycombe |
| | Pauline Hackett - Dundee |
| | Carol Mann - Barnet |
| | Melissa Simon-Gibbs - Bedford |
| | Beth Piercy - London |
| | Melanie Linares - London |
| | Steve Comer - Bristol |
| | Arthur Bywater - Arbroath |
| | Ilya Zboynov - London |
| | Kat McLaughlin - Leuchars |
| | Edyta Nowakowska - London |
| | Chris Dudek - Perth |
| | Lucy Malec - Weybridge |
| | Clark Brown - Dundee |
| | Kirstin Bowie - Ladybank |
| | Paula Donnelly - Broughty Ferry |
| | Steven Donnelly - Broughty Ferry |
| | Malcolm Carter - Coatbridge |
| | Margaret Carter - Coatbridge |
| | Tommy Robertson - Fort William |
| | William Martin - Maryport |
| | Eddie Doyle (senior) - Coatbridge |
| | Edward Doyle - Coatbridge |
| | Vincent Pratt - Workington |
| | John Durham - Monifieth |
| | Nicholas Dale - Leeds |
| | John Carter - Baillieston |
| | Eva Carter - Baillieston |
| | Lorna Smith - Airdrie |
| | Malcolm Smith - Coatbridge |
| | Nelu Balaj - Livingston |
| | Jackie Ross - Dundee |
| | Steve Ross - Dundee |
| | Valerie Mackins - Woking |
| | Peter Mackins - Woking |
| | Alastair M Carmichael - Ballater |
| | John Standaloft - Edinburgh |
| | Mark Longman - Ipswich |
| | Gordon Bell - Edinburgh |
| | Paul Bird - Edinburgh |
| | Thomas A McGrory - Stopsley, Luton |
| | Clare Darwish - Symington, Biggar |
| | Damien Holden - Leyton |
| | John Orr - Nottingham |
| | John Smith - Newcastle Upon Tyne |
| | Carl Murray - Manchester |
| | Steve Lamont - Dundee |
| | Heather Dowdalls - Cupar, Fife |
| | Khawar Nasir - Manchester |
| | Michael Smith - Maryport |
| | Thomas Hilgers - Belcoo |
| | Chris T Mackins - Aberystwyth |
| | Andrew Miles - London-Penge |
| | Wendy Rowe - Grange-Over-Sands |
| | Marie - Blackburn |
| | Susan Little - Cupar |
| | Rita Cocking - Plymouth |
| | Fionnuala Walravens - London |
| | Carol Mullineux - Pontefract |
| | Neil Thomson - Dundee |
| | Carole Petrie - Dundee |
| | Brian Whitehead - Aspatria |
| | Kris Lee - Edinburgh |
| | Stephen Mackins - Friockheim |
| | William Allan - Banknock, Bonnybridge |
| | C Leonard - Arbroath |
| | Mary Dickerson - Birchington Kent |
| | Pete Cresswell - Enniskillen |
| | Gerard Wilkie - Coatbridge |
| | Pauline Boyd - Wishaw |
| | Cecily Mary Shonk - Minster Nr Ramsgate |
| | Susan McAlinney - Fintona |
| | Brian Walker - London |
| | John Sharkey - Maryport |
| | Matthew Dickerson - Birchington |
| | Jennifer Wisden - Manchester |
| | John Whyte - Forfar |
| | Luke Ivory - Dundee |
| | Tom Penman - Dundee |
| | Jim McFarlane - Dundee |
| | Stewart Gibb - Glassford |
| | Jim Barlow - Dundee |
| | Bruce Middleton - Ellon |
| | Linda Clark - Banchory |
| | Jenny Wylie - Lerwick, Shetland Islands |
| | Leah Ganley - Dundee |
| | David Bowes - Dundee |
| | Kenneth Earle - Alloa |
| | Michael James Reid - Stonehaven |
| | Charlotte Carmichael - Crathie |
| | Paul Hay - Kilmarnock |
| | Sharon McHarg - East Kilbride |
| | William G. Falconer - Pitlochry |
| | Roddy McCuish - Oban |
| | Ian Winton Gray - Portsoy |
| | Daniel Frydman - Edinburgh |
| | Ralph Robertson - Glasgow |
We sincerely thank you for your support
Please Click Here If You Know A Friend Who May Want To Support Us By Signing Our Petition
"This sounds like a complete and utter disgrace, and yet again demonstrates the utter contempt with which decent law-abiding tax-payers are treated in this country. I can only say that you have my sincerest best wishes, and it is no wonder that Britain has the highest emigration figures in Western Europe. I have signed your petition and I wish you and your wife a speedy and successful resolution to your crisis. All the best"
Jim S. (Conservative Councillor)
"Your situation is a disgraceful state of affairs and I wish I could do something to help."
Allan H. (SNP Councillor)
"This is a shocking story. I have signed your petition and wish you success in your campaign to rectify this manifest injustice."
Robin W. (St Andrews Councillor)
These Home Office MPs have ignored several faxes and emails from my wife and I, asking them to talk to our MP Mike Weir, and to read this page,
to just look at the injustice of our case. They obviously have no interest in the views of our almost 200 signatories so far, as they have also ignored our communications showing the support shown from them.
If you want to help further, please send an email, write to, or fax to them:
Liam Byrne MP (Home Office),
The House of Commons,
London SW1A 0AA
Telephone: 020 7035 0195
Fax: 0870 336 9034
Email: Privateoffice.external@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk
Home Office Ref: B1038618/2 Mabroka Mackins
The Rt Hon Jacqui Smith MP (Home Office)
The House of Commons,
London SW1A 0AA
Telephone: 020 7035 0198
Fax: 020 7035 0900
Email: Privateoffice.external@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk
Home Office Ref: B1038618/2 Mabroka Mackins
Article I found on the internet:
So what if it's a genuine marriage?
When the Government announced on 5 June 1997 that it was abolishing the primary purpose rule many people, for good reason, heaved a sigh of relief. As the Home Secretary, Jack Straw, stated, "this pernicious rule has penalised genuine marriages, divided families and unnecessarily increased the administrative burden on the immigration system."
He also noted that the Government is "determined to build an immigration and asylum system which is fairer, faster and firmer" and said that the primary purpose rule had created "much misery, delay and expense for no policy result."
Jack Straw said "It is also doubtful that this inherently ineffective and unfair rule has worked to filter out those who sought to cheat the system. The question is therefore not about numbers but about fairness."
The primary purpose rule had meant that people applying to enter the UK on the basis of marriage had to show that, in addition to their marriage being genuine, it had not taken place for the primary purpose of entering the UK. Thus Jack Straw was right in saying that the rule had penalised genuine marriages. But does it really mean that all immigration applicants in genuine marriages will have their cases accepted? The answer is No.
The effect of the abolition of the primary purpose has almost certainly increased the assumption among immigration applicants in genuine marriages that they will have no problems establishing their right to live in the UK (where they can also show they intend to live together and that the foreign spouse will have no recourse to public funds). The NCADC includes among its campaigns men and women in genuine marriages who are facing removal from the UK as deportees or illegal entrants.
The couples in these marriages always assumed that establishing the genuine nature of their marriage would mean they would not suffer problems in gaining the right to live together in the UK.
For many it comes as a surprise that despite the Home Office's acceptance that their marriage is genuine, their application to be allowed to remain together in the UK is refused. The fact remains that where an applicant has been refused the right to remain in the UK on another basis they cannot then apply to stay on the basis of their marriage unless there are exceptional reasons of a compassionate nature.
Thus in the case of Wale Croft, who is married to a British national, she has been issued with a deportation order to leave the UK despite the Home Office's acceptance that her marriage is genuine. The Home Office have told her and her husband that she is to be deported as she is an overstayer and that if her husband wants to be with her, he can leave his career job at his local Council and travel to Nigeria.
As is normal practice, the Home Office is also willing to pay for her husband to travel to Nigeria with his wife. Wale will then be denied the right of re-entering the UK for a period of three years unless she can show that there are exceptional circumstances for her to be allowed to re-enter earlier.
The consequence: penalising a genuine marriage; penalising a British national for marrying a woman liable to deportation even though the marriage is genuine; adding to the burden upon the tax-payer in enforcing the deportation and ensuring that the British spouse will also have flight expenses paid for him; preventing the couple from re-entering the UK together for a period of three years even though this will damage the British partner's career and future job prospects; carrying out the deportation despite the knowledge that eventually the couple will apply for Wale to be allowed to re-enter the UK and that she will almost certainly be successful, thus adding to the administrative burden and costs to the taxpayer.
Why does this ludicrous situation exist? The Home Office will say in order to ensure that the immigration rules are applied properly. However others will say it is clearly aimed at punishing the foreign spouse for having been refused status in the UK on another basis. The rights of the British spouse are irrelevant in this situation. What is therefore clear is that the primary purpose rule is in fact still in operation.
If the Home Office accept that a marriage is genuine, why refuse the application and incur the administrative burden and costs that this involves? Because there is likely to be an unspoken assumption that having been refused permission to stay in the UK on another basis the foreign spouse has only entered into marriage with the primary purpose of remaining in the UK.
The foreign spouse should therefore be punished, no matter what harm this may cause to the British or settled spouse, their children or the genuine marriage. If Jack Straw really wants to end "arbitrary, unfair and ineffective" policies we need a change now so that anyone in a genuine marriage can have the right to remain in the UK.
Jack Straw also described the primary purpose rule as placing "British citizens resident here at a disadvantage compared with other EU nationals resident here ­ to whom no primary purpose rule applied". Yet this situation remains. In the case of Margaret Deasy, a British woman who married a Romanian asylum seeker, Mircea Ilin, her husband's application to remain in the UK on the basis of their marriage was refused because he had had his asylum claim refused.
The Immigration Service carried out a surveillance operation involving six Immigration Officers in three cars to follow Margaret so that they could eventually trace and arrest her husband. Her husband spent over two months in Rochester prison but was eventually released and granted a five year visa to stay in the UK. This was after Margaret traced her Irish ancestry and registered as an Irish citizen. Exercising her legal rights under European Union Law, Margaret managed to succeed in gaining the right for her husband to remain in the UK.
So genuine marriage or not, a major issue for married couples is the immigration status of their partner at the time they apply for permission to stay on the basis of their marriage, not whether or not their marriage is genuine. At the time of her husband's incarceration in Rochester prison when Margaret Deasy was campaigning for his right to stay she said: "I didn't know his immigration status when I met him, and it wasn't relevant because I fell in love".
Will Jack Straw ensure that all the claims he has made following the abolition of the primary purpose rule apply to all genuine marriages or just some? If he wants us to believe his claims he should change his Government's policy and allow all people in genuine marriages the right to stay in the UK, and end the threat of deportation or removal being faced by many married partners and their children.
Pierre Makhlouf
NCADC & Hackney Law Centre
[ top of the page ]
