An African migrant has secured the right to remain in the United Kingdom after an immigration tribunal accepted his harrowing account of being forced into sexual slavery by a homeowner who took him in.
A Journey from Persecution to Exploitation
The man, who is from Sierra Leone, entered the UK in February 2020 and claimed asylum in January 2021. He told authorities he faced persecution in his home country due to his political activities as a member of the All People's Congress (APC), the main opposition party to President Julius Bio. He claimed to have participated in elections and conferences, and was attacked by 'thugs' from the ruling Sierra Leone People's Party (SLPP) during a by-election, forcing him to flee.
Upon arrival in Britain, his ordeal continued. The Upper Tribunal of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber heard he was met at the airport and taken to a house where his passport was confiscated. He was made to work from 5am until 10pm daily without pay. After several months, he left with nothing and slept rough until a Nigerian woman offered him shelter.
Forced into Sexual Servitude
The tribunal was told that this new situation quickly became exploitative. The migrant stated he was required to clean the woman's house and to have sex with her and her friends against his will. Deputy Upper Tribunal Judge David Clarke summarised the claim, noting: "The (migrant) says that he was required to clean the Nigerian woman's house and required to have sex with her and her friends against his will."
He alleged this abuse lasted for three months, until December 2020, when he refused a direct demand for sex in exchange for food. "When he rejected her, she hit him, threw him out of the house and threw the food in the bin," the tribunal heard. After being made homeless again, he encountered someone who helped him lodge a formal protection claim.
Legal Battle and Tribunal Decision
The First-Tier Tribunal initially granted his asylum claim on human rights grounds. While the judge did not accept he was of 'adverse interest' to the SLPP, they did find a 'well-founded fear of persecution' in Sierra Leone. Critically, the judge accepted the migrant was a victim of trafficking and would be at risk of re-trafficking if returned.
The Home Office appealed this decision, arguing there were insufficient reasons to believe he faced a risk of re-trafficking. The case was escalated to the Upper Tribunal for review.
However, Judge Clarke found the Home Office's appeal fundamentally flawed. He noted the Secretary of State had already conceded the man was a trafficking victim and 'did not suggest that the (migrant) was not at risk of re-trafficking'. The judge stated this left the government's appeal grounds "in shambles." He also highlighted a finding of fact linking the political thugs who attacked the migrant in Sierra Leone to trafficking gangs.
Dismissing the appeal, Judge Clarke ruled: "The Decision of First-tier Tribunal Judge Abebrese…does not contain any material errors of law and therefore stands." This final ruling allows the Sierra Leonean man to remain in the UK legally.
Implications and Aftermath
This case underscores the complex intersections between political asylum, modern slavery, and human trafficking within the UK's immigration system. The tribunal's decision hinged on the risk of re-trafficking, a recognised ground for protection under human rights law, even when aspects of a claimant's original persecution narrative are not fully accepted. The failure of the Home Office to coherently challenge the re-trafficking risk proved decisive in the migrant's victory.
