UK Home Office rejects Nawaz Sharif’s request for extension of moratorium

UK Home Office rejects Nawaz Sharif's request for extension of stay

LONDON: Former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s visa to the United Kingdom is valid but an application for extension of his stay with the right to appeal against the Home Office’s decision has been turned down by the Home Office.

Hussain Nawaz Sharif here confirmed that Nawaz Sharif’s extension in the stay application has been rejected but an appeal has already been filed in the Immigration Tribunal.

A Home Office source said Nawaz Sharif has been given an extension of his stay since his arrival in the UK two years ago, but the source did not say how many times he was given an extension and why he refused this time.

Hussain Nawaz said: “While rejecting the application, the Home Office allowed the right to appeal and the process has already begun. We are confident that the Immigration Tribunal will extend the service to Nawaz Sharif keeping all the facts in mind.

The News and Geo spoke to four different immigration lawyers who said Nawaz Sharif has several options as per UK immigration laws.

Hatim Ali, a UK lead immigration solicitor at GSC Solicitors LLP, said: “If the previous visit visa extension was on medical grounds (which appears to be the case here), typically you can continue the extension for a total of 18 months In this particular case, it appears that the Home Office was no longer willing to continue the expansion on that ground.

He added: “If the latest application for extension is rejected with full right to appeal, the entire appeal process could take anywhere from 9 months to more than 20 months to be decided by the Immigration Tribunal in the UK.” This period does not take into account any possible subsequent judicial review after all appeals have been exhausted.

“So although Mr. Nawaz Sharif has been denied, it does not necessarily mean the end of the process.”

Immigration Solicitor Muhammad Amjad said that Nawaz Sharif “must have come to the UK as a visitor and applied for an extension on the ground that it has been denied. He will remain here legally pending the appeal. It is possible that the tribunal will grant him an extension of his visit visa even if the appeal is denied. Amjad further said: “The application on medical grounds will be considered outside the immigration rules on the grounds of human rights, that is, under Article 8 and possibly human rights.” Also under Article 3 of the European Convention on These are difficult and complicated applications to be successful. Article 3 would require Nawaz Sharif to prove that there would be a real risk of serious, rapid and irreversible deterioration in his health, resulting in either acute suffering or substantial reduction in life expectancy due to lack of or access to medical treatment. There will be a decrease. This is a very high threshold and it is very difficult to succeed at it. The limit under Article 8 is low, but those applications involve a great deal of discretion and are judged on the basis of what is fair and reasonable, based on the concept of proportionality.

“Overall, Nawaz Sharif will continue to be a legal resident in the UK until his appeal is decided. Any appeal can take 12-18 months or more.

Barrister Rashad Ahmed said there are many grounds and precedents available under UK immigration laws.

Solicitor Rashad Aslam said that Nawaz Sharif has several options to continue legally. He said that Article 3 of the ECHR provides protection against torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. “In medical claims a claimant may claim that their return would result in inhumane or degrading treatment.”

Immigration lawyer barrister Rashad Ahmed said Nawaz Sharif will continue to remain in the UK legally while the immigration tribunal is considering his appeal. He said that due to the ongoing backlog due to the pandemic, it may take almost two years to decide on Nawaz Sharif’s appeal and if his appeal is rejected he will have to renew the entire process through a fresh application. right to start. .

.

Leave a Reply