The case of “AB” vs The Home Secretary, heard at the High Court 30 October – November 1, looked like a pretty routine asylum claim (which was refused). But the judgement contains a rather surprising twist.
When AB was deported from Brook House removal centre to his home country, a removal certificate showed that “various paperwork” was packed up among his things. This certificate was later corruptly redacted, according to the judge, Justice Mostyn.
His judgement says:
“The original clean certificate was only produced by the Secretary of State following a request made by the claimant’s solicitors after the doctored certificate has been produced in evidence as exhibits to the witness statements … It is obvious that a semi-translucent piece of paper was placed over part of it when copies were made to obliterate the reference to “various paperwork” (as well as some other things of no consequence)…
I regret to have to find, but I must, that both of these witnesses were well aware that the certificate had been altered by somebody who felt that it was helpful to this defence to obliterate a reference to “various paperwork”. I am doubtful whether these witnesses were actively complicit in what was an act of forgery but I am convinced that they knew more than they were letting on to me.
The conduct of the Secretary of State’s agents in falsifying the room clearance certificate is corrupt and truly shocking. When agents of the state falsify documents it undermines, if not fatally, then certainly very seriously, the trust of the people in the operation of the rule of law. It makes no difference if, as here, the agents are private contractors to whom the Secretary of State has outsourced her powers. Corruption by state officials is insidious and corrosive and it is the duty of the authorities where it is found to root it out ruthlessly.”
The judgement has been referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions. Following the jailing of Clive Carter, and the launch of a Serious Fraud Office inquiry into overcharging claims, could we be seeing more G4S staff up before the courts?