An Afghan engineer whose application to move to the UK after the Taliban takeover was repeatedly rejected has won his court bid to have the case reconsidered.
The man, known only as MKA, had worked with the British Embassy in Kabul and the British Army for eight years but the panel in charge of deciding whether to accept people under the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (Arap) continually refused his application to come to the UK.
Now, the High Court in London has accused the Ministry of Defence of making “errors” and “irrational” decisions in his case.
The Arap panel had repeatedly rejected his application, claiming he was not eligible.
“The claimant succeeds on the challenge that the defendant misapplied and/or misunderstood his policy by wrongly imposing conditions of direct employment at a time when that was no longer a policy requirement for the Arap,” Mrs Justice Foster said.
“The claimant succeeds on the basis that the decision is not rationally defensible in that the reasons disclose material errors, namely the mischaracterisation and/or ignoring of important material evidence as to the scope and importance of MKA's contribution and the risks he was running.
“The decision should be reconsidered by the defendant in light of the policy properly construed and the material which is now available.”
The Afghan national had worked as a technical internet and communications engineer between 2012 to 2020 for the British military at Camp Qargha in Afghanistan.
From 2014 he also worked as a technical engineer at the British Embassy.
The projects he worked on directly supported the British mission and included the construction of an internet tower connecting networks of the British and the American military in Afghanistan.
The court heard that as a result he has faced threats and intimidation from the Taliban. He has been living in Dubai while he awaits the UK's decision.
Mrs Justice Foster criticised the panel for failing to take account of his work.
“The absence of any mention of the work at the British Embassy by the panel is striking,” she said.
“This evidence indicated that the claimant was involved in several capacities working for the mission in Afghanistan, and that he had an obvious and public connection with the British mission as well as the British forces.
“It is instructive that the grounds of defence states that this material concerning work over a number of years was not before the decision-makers. If that is so, that is a significant procedural error. I take the view it is very likely the panel did not consider it.
“This is a material error given the importance of consistent and long-term involvement at the embassy for the escalation of risk and the depth it gives to the claimant's service to the UK government.
“Each of these issues mean that the decision must be reconsidered, and necessarily, on the basis of the materials that are now before the defendant.
“The reasons show material errors were made and the conclusion cannot be safely justified.”
The Ministry of Defence has received almost 140,000 applications to the Arap scheme and 15,400 have been successful.
