Rita Odafe
Olutobi Ogunbawo
UK Court Overrules Deportation Stay for Nigerian Man
A recent decision by a UK upper tribunal has reversed a previous ruling that halted the deportation of Olutobi Ogunbawo, a 43-year-old Nigerian citizen.
The reversal occurred after Ogunbawo’s wife, Maria Adesanya, argued that in vitro fertilization (IVF) wasn’t accessible in Nigeria, which was a pivotal point in their defense.
Ogunbawo had been sentenced in 2019 for immigration-related crimes, specifically for collaborating with a British citizen to falsely claim paternity, and had completed a three-year prison term.
After his release, he was subjected to deportation procedures. In January 2023, an initial tribunal judge favored Ogunbawo, citing the potential negative impact of deportation on his wife’s IVF treatment prospects.
Maria provided testimony highlighting that IVF was crucial for their family planning, claiming it wasn’t available in Nigeria.
However, the Home Department contested this assertion, urging that the judge’s reliance on Maria’s statement was not substantiated by concrete evidence.
Upon reviewing the situation, the upper tribunal ruled on November 4, 2024, that the original finding was unjustified.
It noted that the lower tribunal had failed to seek independent verification of Maria’s claims, suggesting that a basic online search would have shown that IVF services do exist in Nigeria, weakening the couple’s argument.
The tribunal’s judgment criticized the previous ruling as follows: “We conclude that the judge erred in exclusively relying upon Ms A’s (referring to Maria) personal evidence when finding as a fact that IVF treatment is unavailable in Nigeria,” as reported by Daily Mail on Sunday.
Consequently, the upper tribunal annulled the previous decision, mandating that the case be re-evaluated by a different judge.
“We observe the Secretary of State’s unchallenged assertion before us that even the most basic Google search reveals the existence of IVF treatment in Nigeria.”
“The Secretary of State’s appeal is allowed to the extent that the decision of the First-tier Tribunal is set aside in its entirety.
“The appeal is to be remitted to the First-tier Tribunal to be heard by any judge other than First-tier Tribunal Judge Malone,” the tribunal concluded.
