Decision: re-socialized migrant is not a threat to public security or safety

A father of four, who was successfully re-socialized is not a threat to public security or safety eight years after the commitment of crimes. Hiss deportation would be an unjustified interference in his right to a family life.

On 20 February 2020, the Head of the Office for Foreigners granted a humanitarian stay for our client, who leads a family life in Poland (decision no. DL.WIPO.412.116.2019/JPP). The Association wrote about a case earlier.

The migrant resides in Poland with his wife and four underage children. He spends a lot of time with his family, engages in family life, actively plays with children and helps his wife with household chores. A few years ago his whole family received a humanitarian stay in Poland.

Due to his criminal past (he committed crimes against property) he was not granted a humanitarian stay together with his family. A competent Border Guard claimed that he posed a threat to public security and safety and gave him a deportation order. The Border Guard did not take into consideration the fact that he had been successfully reformed and benefitted from an early parole.

In the appeal the Association held that in the state under the rule of law, unless there is new evidence, it is unacceptable for one public authority to hold that a person no longer poses a threat to the society and for the other one to claim otherwise.

The Head of the Office for Foreigners agreed and granted humanitarian stay to our client. He committed crimes more than 8 years ago, he had been successfully reformed and during his probation period he complied with his obligations. Additionally, after his early parole he did not violate public order, he was very critical of the crimes he had committed and regrets having committed them.  The migrants has flawless neighbor’s opinion and supports his family. All those circumstances led to the conclusion that he no longer poses a threat to public safety and security, and that his deportation would be an unjustified interference in his family life.

The Association participated in the proceedings as the social organization. The Association was represented by an attorney-at-law Małgorzata Jaźwińska.

Tagged with: , , ,