Following a crucial High Court decision, former BBC journalists in Afghanistan may have another chance at UK relocation.
- The Afghan Relocation and Assistance Policy (ARAP) had previously rejected them based on criteria errors, now reconsidered.
- The court identified flawed decision-making concerning the journalists’ roles in supporting British missions.
- BBC journalists have faced Taliban threats due to their perceived affiliation with the UK government.
- A verdict mandates the Ministry of Defence ARAP team to re-evaluate within 21 days.
In a significant development, the High Court has mandated a reassessment of the relocation applications of eight former BBC journalists left behind in Afghanistan. Initially denied under the Afghan Relocation and Assistance Policy (ARAP), these applications will now be reconsidered in light of procedural errors identified by the court. The journalists, who collaborated with British military operations and undertook activities that supported British government objectives, are at heightened risk due to Taliban reprisals.
The court’s scrutiny revealed that the caseworker erred in assessing the eligibility of the journalists by focusing narrowly on their employment by the BBC. Instead of considering the broader context of their work alongside and in support of Her Majesty’s Government, the analysis was restricted to their direct employment status. This misjudgment has necessitated a re-evaluation of their applications, with implications for their potential relocation to safety in the UK.
These journalists have endured a perilous existence, marked by grave threats and assaults from the Taliban, which have intensified since the fall of Kabul. Their work, which included exposing Taliban atrocities and advocating for democratic principles and human rights, inevitably placed them in the Taliban’s crosshairs, underscoring their eligibility for relocation under ARAP criteria.
The situation is compounded by the fact that, in August 2021, the then Foreign Secretary assured Afghan journalists endangered due to their association with the UK that they would find refuge. However, the initial rejection of their applications left them vulnerable for over a year, until this legal intervention.
Represented by human rights attorneys from Leigh Day, the journalists sought judicial review, arguing compellingly that they met the relocation criteria due to their contributions to British governmental objectives in the region. The legal team underscored the rigorous need for precise decision-making in cases where applicants’ lives are at stake, a sentiment echoed by the court.
As mandated, the Ministry of Defence’s ARAP team is now tasked with delivering a fresh verdict on these applications within a 21-day timeframe. This decision carries the potential to alter the precarious status quo faced by these individuals, offering a glimmer of hope after months of fear and uncertainty.
The High Court ruling reopens the possibility of safety for journalists facing persecution, highlighting the importance of accurate procedural evaluation.
