Deportation breaches my rights, says drug dealer
Sharif claims he’s been here ‘too long to leave’
A FAILED asylum seeker who raked in £90,000 a year from benefits and drug dealing is demanding to be allowed to stay in Scotland – on the grounds he has been here so long that deporting him would be a breach of his human rights.
Omar Sharif had his original claim rejected more than five years ago but has continued to raise his family in Glasgow’s west end, supported by state hand-outs and income from selling a stimulant drug.
The 48-year-old Somalian was earlier believed to have used up all his chances to appeal the decision – but a recent Home Office U-turn means he will not be deported while authorities reconsider the case.
The father-of-eight now hopes he will be granted permission to remain in the country thanks to historic inefficiencies in the asylum system. A backlog of up to 450,000 files was revealed in 2006 and, as cases were reviewed, more than one in three were allowed to stay – mainly because they had been in Britain so long they could argue their human rights would be breached if they were deported.
Last night, Scottish Tory chief whip John Lamont said: ‘The issue here is that people whose asylum applications have been refused should be kicked out the country, and not supported by the state.
‘If this fresh appeal is successful, and this man is allowed to remain in the country effectively because the authorities have failed to deport him, then it is a disgrace.’
Sharif’s earnings first came to light last year after police, wrongly suspecting he was a heroin dealer, started investigating his finances.
They discovered £39,000 in a bank account and £5,000 in his home.
‘If this fresh appeal is successful, it is a disgrace’
Believing his wealth to be the result of illegal drug trading, they planned to seize cash but dropped the case when immigration authorities were forced to admit much of his fortune had been paid to him in benefits.
Papers from the case showed Sharif had received £153,000 from the UK Border Agency (UKBA) since 2003 in payments of £423 a week. His council tax, utility bills and housing costs were state-funded separately.
Documents also showed he earned £40,000 annually selling khat – a flowering plant native to East Africa which contains an amphetamine-like stimulant.
Although legal in the UK, many countries have banned it and the World Health Organisation has classed it as a ‘drug of abuse’.
At the time, a sheriff’s report on the action stated the only reason Sharif was allowed to remain in the country despite ‘exhausting’ all rights of appeal was because his two grown-up sons faced prosecution.
His solicitor, Peter Farrell, later said the Somalian was awaiting the outcome of a fresh application made through the ‘legacy’ procedure.
When that was refused, the solicitor said, an appeal date was set to challenge the decision but in an 11th-hour turnaround the Home Office retracted its ruling and will now consider the case afresh.
While ‘country guidance’ suggests it could be unsafe to return people to Somalia, the lawyer admitted the principal reason behind Mr Sharif’s claim is that he and his family ‘have been in this country for a long, long time’.
Mr Sharif last week refused to comment but, speaking a year ago, he insisted the money from his khat business was distributed back to the community.
He said: ‘I cannot go back to Somalia, as things are so bad there at the moment. My wife and I love Scotland and want to make a good contribution to society.’