Man Who Admitted He’d Lie to Stay in UK Shocks Everyone After Winning Right to Remain

An Iraqi man who arrived in the UK in 2016 by hiding inside a lorry has now been given permission to stay in the country, even though he openly admitted at the beginning that he didn’t have a real reason to seek asylum.

When he was first questioned by immigration officials, he said something that shocked many people. He told them clearly, “I don’t have a real reason to be here. Give me some time and I’ll make up a reason.” That statement was recorded and used against him in the years that followed.

Even though he was honest about not having a valid reason back then, he fought hard to stay in the UK. His first official application for asylum was rejected by the Home Office in 2019. After that, he tried appealing the decision twice once in 2020 and again in 2022—but both of those appeals failed. Many thought his case was over and that he would be sent back to Iraq.

But he didn’t give up. Eventually, his case went to a higher immigration court called the Upper Tribunal. That’s where things took a surprising turn. In a hearing held in April, he claimed that before he came to the UK, he had been captured and tortured by ISIS. He said he was detained, physically abused, and even had an attempted amputation that didn’t fully succeed. His body still showed signs of these injuries.

To back up his story, a medical expert from a respected organization called Freedom From Torture examined him. The doctor said his scars and wounds matched his story. She confirmed that he had injuries, including a deep scar on his arm, that were consistent with someone who had been tortured.

The expert also said that the man had complex PTSD, a serious mental health condition caused by long-term trauma and violence. She pointed out that some of his story had changed a little over time, but explained that this often happens with people who have experienced deep psychological damage—it doesn’t mean they’re lying.

Even with this new information, the Home Office wasn’t convinced. Officials pointed back to his original interview, reminding the court that he had once admitted he was planning to make up a reason to stay. They argued that this first comment proved he was not being honest and couldn’t be trusted.

But his lawyers explained that his first interview had taken place right after a dangerous and exhausting journey in a lorry. They said he was under a lot of stress and didn’t feel safe, and that it was unfair to judge him based on what he said in that moment. They also argued that the authorities didn’t follow proper procedures to support vulnerable people during that first interview.

After looking at all the evidence, the judges decided to rule in his favour. They believed his story about being abused by ISIS and other armed groups. They said that sending him back to Iraq would be unsafe, especially since he had no family or identity papers.

Deputy Judge Paul Lewis explained in his decision that while the man had clearly admitted at first that he had no reason to be in the UK, his situation had since changed. Based on his medical condition, his history of abuse, and the risks he would face if returned to Iraq, the judge granted him humanitarian protection. This means he can now stay in the UK legally.

This decision has sparked a lot of debate. Some people feel that it shows how complex asylum cases really are, and that we must be careful not to judge people too quickly. They say survivors of torture and trauma deserve understanding and support, even if they don’t explain everything clearly at first.

Others, however, are upset by the outcome. They believe that someone who once admitted he was going to invent a story should not be allowed to stay. They worry that cases like this make the asylum system look weak or easy to exploit.

Now, this man’s case is being talked about as an example of how difficult and emotional asylum decisions can be. It’s not just about whether someone tells the perfect story from day one.

It’s about digging deeper into what a person has really been through and whether sending them back would put their life in danger. This one case has raised important questions about how the system works and how we treat people who come here hoping for safety, even when their past is complicated.