An Iranian man has been given asylum in the United Kingdom after a legal fight in which he claimed his life would be at risk if he returned to his home country due to his smuggling of sex toys and taking part in anti-Iranian government protests.
The anonymous man said that bringing sex toys such as vibrators into the country made him a target under Sharia law which is practiced strictly in Iran. The selling or importing sex toys is illegal in the Islamic nation and the man told the court he had come to the “adverse attention of the Iranian authorities as a smuggler of sex toys.”
His original bid for asylum was turned down when a court found his story “inconsistent evidence about the number of boxes he smuggled.” Officials also dismissed his claims of facing punishment for protesting against the Iranian regime in the UK. Footage of him at London rallies was seen online, but the hearing labeled it as an attempt to support a “ruse.”
The case was later reviewed by the Upper Tribunal of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber. That court found that the first hearing had made a mistake, according to the Daily Mail.
Judge Paul Lodato who oversaw the appeal said the man had taken part in nine protests in front of the Iranian Embassy in London. Lodato accepted that while he was not “a central or prominent figure among these crowds,” his consistent involvement over four years showed a “genuine sense of political grievance.”
"It can be seen that he has been posting anti-regime and pro-Kurdish rhetoric on a regular basis since October 2021," the judge wrote.
The Home Office argued that the man’s involvement in political demonstrations as soon as he arrived in Britain looked like a made-up plan to back up a false asylum claim. But Judge Lodato disagreed: “When looking at this pattern of behavior through the lens of the standard of a reasonable degree of likelihood,” Lodato said, “it strikes me as far more likely that the [Iranian] has conducted himself in this way as soon as he was free to do so, and has continued to do so, because he was motivated by a genuine sense of political grievance.”
He continued: “I have carefully considered the timing of his posts to assess whether his political opinions betrayed the mechanical and routine postings which might be expected of a metronomic and cynical exercise designed to bolster a false asylum claim. I could discern no such patterns. Instead, the frequency resonated with a more natural engagement with political social media of this nature.”
The court ruled that the man faced a “real risk of persecution” if he were sent back to Iran. He was granted asylum on grounds tied to the refugee convention.
The anonymous man said that bringing sex toys such as vibrators into the country made him a target under Sharia law which is practiced strictly in Iran. The selling or importing sex toys is illegal in the Islamic nation and the man told the court he had come to the “adverse attention of the Iranian authorities as a smuggler of sex toys.”
His original bid for asylum was turned down when a court found his story “inconsistent evidence about the number of boxes he smuggled.” Officials also dismissed his claims of facing punishment for protesting against the Iranian regime in the UK. Footage of him at London rallies was seen online, but the hearing labeled it as an attempt to support a “ruse.”
The case was later reviewed by the Upper Tribunal of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber. That court found that the first hearing had made a mistake, according to the Daily Mail.
Judge Paul Lodato who oversaw the appeal said the man had taken part in nine protests in front of the Iranian Embassy in London. Lodato accepted that while he was not “a central or prominent figure among these crowds,” his consistent involvement over four years showed a “genuine sense of political grievance.”
"It can be seen that he has been posting anti-regime and pro-Kurdish rhetoric on a regular basis since October 2021," the judge wrote.
The Home Office argued that the man’s involvement in political demonstrations as soon as he arrived in Britain looked like a made-up plan to back up a false asylum claim. But Judge Lodato disagreed: “When looking at this pattern of behavior through the lens of the standard of a reasonable degree of likelihood,” Lodato said, “it strikes me as far more likely that the [Iranian] has conducted himself in this way as soon as he was free to do so, and has continued to do so, because he was motivated by a genuine sense of political grievance.”
He continued: “I have carefully considered the timing of his posts to assess whether his political opinions betrayed the mechanical and routine postings which might be expected of a metronomic and cynical exercise designed to bolster a false asylum claim. I could discern no such patterns. Instead, the frequency resonated with a more natural engagement with political social media of this nature.”
The court ruled that the man faced a “real risk of persecution” if he were sent back to Iran. He was granted asylum on grounds tied to the refugee convention.
