An Iraqi asylum seeker has had his deportation delayed amid claims a people smuggler threw away his phone and ID. Judge David Kelly ordered a fresh immigration tribunal hearing after the man appealed the Home Office's decision to deport him. The man, who the court ruled should remain anonymous, left Iraq having being told he faced arrest after being spotted on CCTV allegedly delivering a package containing exam papers a day before pupils were due to set a test.

He was working as a courier and said he did not know the contents of the package, but feared being targeted because of his employer's political ties.

After seeking refuge with the Ashti Human Rights Organisation, he left Iraq and sought international protection in the UK.

He later said an "agent" who organised his travel to the UK threw out his documents and forced him to get rid of his phone, containing family contact information.

Lacking proper identification in Iraq heightens the risk of interrogation or arrest and restricts movement at government checkpoints.

Without his family's contact information, he could not arrange for his lost ID to be replaced.

A higher immigration tribunal overturned a deportation order on appeal, ruling the initial judge made errors in assessing the case.
The case will be reheard by another court.

Home Office officials are examining how judges are applying the rights to a family life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the Daily Express can confirm.

A number of cases will be selected and examined for loopholes, it is understood.

This will identify how some human rights lawyers and migrants abuse the law to avoid deportation.

Whilst the work is in its "early stages", ministers have been warned “too many” foreign criminals have been allowed to stay for reasons which “defy common sense”.

Fury erupted last week after a Romanian rapist who hid his convictions used human rights laws to avoid being deported.

The sex offender claimed he was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and used Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights to challenge plans to send him back to Romania.

The man, known only as ZA, applied for settled status on the basis he had a partner here but did not tell the authorities of his previous convictions.

The migrant, who was granted anonymity, said he was attacked and raped in prison and that the “physical or mental condition...is such that it would be unjust or oppressive” to extradite him.

During his initial asylum claim, the court found inconsistencies in his story.

At his first hearing, the man said a people smuggler had thrown his identity card away, but in a separate immigration statement he said he had left it in Iraq.

In another instance, he said his phone had been damaged but told immigration the agent facilitating his passage to the UK had thrown it away.

"I have reluctantly concluded that I must set aside the decision of the First-tier Tribunal and remit the appeal for a complete rehearing" Judge Kelly ruled.

"This will of course give the appellant a further opportunity to address the inconsistencies in his account that arise for his disavowed statement."

There were conflicting reports about the amount of time he spent with Ashti, although a letter from the human rights group corroborated the number of days he had stayed with them.

While the lower immigration tribunal said the inconsistencies undermined his credibility, the upper court found the reason for these inconsistencies - including potential translation errors and administrative mistakes - were not properly considered.