Kemi Badenoch today led a furious return on a 'crazy' court that ruled that a family of Gaza refugees in the UK should be admitted despite the fact that he must endure a scheme for Ukrainians.
Critics have warned that the decision of the immigration ribunal can open the locks for everyone in a conflict zone that applies for asylum.
Keir Starmer replied that he agreed that the statement was 'wrong' and that the government looked at the law.
The mother, father and four children between the ages of seven and 18 years had applied for the family scheme in Ukraine with the request to join their brother who already lived in the UK – who they had not seen for 17 years.
The case was initially rejected by the Home Office. But Immigration -judges have now destroyed that, based on the fact that human rights have been violated.
They concluded that the rights of the applicants in a family life was struck, although they would not have counted as a 'unity' before the last flare conflict in Gaza.
At PMQ's, the Tory leader demanded whether the government intended to appeal. Mrs Badenoch said that the UK had to place 'our interests' above the 'Evir'.
“This is not what the schedule was designed for. This decision is completely wrong, “she said.
Sir Keir said the Home Office is looking at the 'Legal Loophole'.
'I don't agree with the decision … It should be the parliament that makes the rules, “he said.
Kemi Badenoch today led a furious declaration of a 'crazy' court that a family of Gaza refugees must be admitted to the UK, despite the fact that he has to apply for a scheme for the Ukrainians
The family of six from Gaza reportedly applied to the family scheme in Ukraine with the request to join their brother in the UK, but the Home Office rejected their request (file image of Palestinians in a refugee camp in Gaza)
They family said that the family schedule of Ukraine suited their circumstances best after their house in Gaza had been destroyed in an air raid and that they were confronted for daily threats for their lives by further attacks in the refugee camp where they lived (file image of a refugee camp)))
Despite warnings from home office, the decision came to the decision that this case could open the locks for the admission of everyone in conflict zones with family in the UK '.
They family said that the family schedule of Ukraine suited their circumstances best after their house in Gaza was destroyed in an air raid and that they were confronted for daily threats for their lives by further attacks in the refugee camp where they lived.
The scheme enabled Ukrainians and their family members to find refuge in Great -Britain if they have a family member who is established a British national or in the UK.
It closed last February, almost two years after it was set up in March 2022.
The family argued that their application, which was submitted in January 2024, had to be granted despite collision with the rules for schedules because their situation was so 'compelling and compassionate'.
An immigration ribunal initially refused the claim because the scheme for Ukrainians did not apply to the situation of the Palestinian family.
The judge ruled that it should be up to parliament to decide which countries should benefit from resettlement schemes.
But this decision was destroyed by Judge Hugo Norton-Taylor in a tribunal at a higher level.
He granted the Palestinians the right to live in the UK with their brother on the basis of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which outlines the right to a family life.
Judge Norton-Taylor said that the 'extreme and life-threatening' situation of the family weighs heavier against the 'public interest' of rules that regulate access to the UK.
The home office said that the statement was not the same as a resettlement schedule for people from Gaza and that the similar claims would dispute as that of the Palestinian family of six in the future.
Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said that this case illustrated that changes in human rights laws were necessary, so that decisions about who could live in the UK, are at the parliament and not individual judges.
He criticized the 'alarming and dangerous' statement and told De Telegraaf that it provides a basis for everyone in a conflict zone around the world with relationships in the UK to get here'.
