Court Rules In Favour Of "Gay" Asylum Seekers.

[OrcadianOil]

A Supreme Court ruling has allowed two homosexuals, from Cameroon and Iran respectively, to gain asylum here in the UK because they claimed that being sent back to their own countries would be detrimental to their safety, as homosexuals.
Is this a humane judgement to be accepted without comment?
Or could it be the opening of the floodgates as a means to bogus asylum seekers merely claiming to be homosexual in order for their applications to succeed?
The only thing which troubles me is: how does one prove that s/he is a homosexual?


http://www.dailymail....tle-stay-Britain.html

[OrcadianOil]

sp1814,
Have you not seen my 12:51 post?

[sp1814]

OrcadianOil

The burden of proof would be on the applicant. Multiple photos of the applicant with their partner, sworn affidavits from family/friends...

...and here's the thing - because it's so difficult to prove oppression due to sexuality, the likelihood is that fake asylum seekers would probably go down the route of claiming political asylum.

[OrcadianOil]

sp1814,
Thanks for that. And that's really my point - it would be wholly unenforceable from the "burden of proof" perspective. It makes me wonder what "proof" the men in the link provided?

[rov1200]

Why would they admit being homosexual if at that time asylum had not been granted. The subsequent fallout would heap enormous pressures on their being returned to their own countries.

No, its all a lie!

either they are not homosexuals or
their home country would not treat them as harshly as described.