MUSLIM STUDENT MARRIES MENTALLY HANDICAP WOMAN TO AVOID DEPORTATION – Foreign nationals continue to use and abuse Britain’s Human Rights laws in order to remain in the country.
Recently two Pakistani students married mentally handicapped British women to avoid being deported.
The first was a man in his 20’s who after exhausting every legal avenue to avoid deportation began a relationship with a mentally handicapped woman in her late teens. The couple was married in a Muslim ceremony in June 2012 but after months of legal wrangling, that again cost the taxpayer dearly, a High Court judge ruled the marriage to be a sham and he was finally deported.
In the second almost identical case the couple produced a child and therefore the man continues to fight a deportation order under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights which covers the ‘Right to Family Life’.
As with the first case the man, in his 30s, married a woman of similar age and again was married in a Muslim ceremony in late 2011 just six weeks after his application to stay in Britain was refused by the immigration authorities.
At one point in the investigation an anonymous informant contacted the immigration officials and reported that the woman’s stepfather had been given £20,000 by the man’s family in order to approve their marriage.
Within months of their marriage, the woman became pregnant and give birth to a baby boy in the summer of 2012; the Pakistani national is now demanding that UK immigration officials provide him with residency in accordance with his human rights and that of the European Convention on Human Rights.
In both cases, the immigration authorities are questioning whether the women involved had the mental capacity to consent to marriage; it is the stance of the authorities that both women suffer from such mental disabilities that neither would have the mental capacity to decide upon entering into a contract of marriage.
More on this story … Daily Mail
Meebal.com says …
We like to think of the law as an all encumbering force of sobriety and that judges’ decisions are based upon clear facts and basic common sense.
It’s tough being a judge; that might not appear the case considering some of the crackpot rulings some judges’ come up with but the fact is the law is never able to say that it doesn’t have an answer; that is no matter what comes before a judge a decision has to be made.
A judge does not have the power to arbitrarily conclude a case as they see fit for they are bound by legal constraints which must follow the ‘Literal Rule’ that is the plain meaning of words within legislation, the ‘Golden Rule’ which allows for judges’ to depart from a word’s normal meaning if such would produce an absurd result and finally the ‘Mischief Rule’ which attempts to detect any mischief that the legislation set out to avoid and therefore apply a meaningful rule in accordance with such legislation.
Yes, the legal system is highly complex but a judges’ primary task is simply to interpret legislation and to avoid a ruling that is absurd; although with Human Rights legislation it appears that such was written in a way that instead of protecting those from abuse it has allowed people to manipulate and abuse the system for their own personal gain; generally this involves ultimately fleecing the taxpayer in such cases.
Another issue is one of the Muslim marriage ‘nikah’ ceremonies that were performed. Clearly Islamic law has no place in Britain and therefore any such marriage is in fact illegal unless the couple undertakes a British civil marriage.
One more issue here is that the man claims that he would be killed by family members back in Pakistan for getting married to a white British girl; this certainly indicates that the liberal ideology of multicultural cohesion is simply delusional and also clearly indicates how we are viewed by religious zealots of the Islamic persuasion.
Mr Justice Keehan finally ruled that the woman did have the mental capacity to consent to a sexual relationship but did not have the mental capacity to enter into a contract of marriage; he therefore ruled the marriage a ‘non-marriage’.
Despite the ruling, the issue of the Pakistani national’s ability to remain in Britain lingers and the likely outcome is that despite breaking the law to clandestinely remain in Britain he will be awarded residency and the outcome of which will mean yet another foreign national for the taxpayer to support.
In this case, like so many others, common sense doesn’t appear to prevail but that is not the fault of the judges but rather the incompetence of Government for allowing legislation to be passed that has not been carefully considered or tested. Of course we could help the situation by pulling out of the European Courts; something that the Justice Secretary Chris Grayling is now considering.
There is a growing discontentment among the British people; for at every turn it appears as if the Government and our courts are failing to prevent the taxpayer from being financially abused and turning Britain into a cesspit of freeloaders and criminals.