TNAG-2205-FCO40-3162-Immigration-policy-changes-to-rules-1990 — Page 128

RESTRICTED

FM HONG KONG

TO IMMEDIATE FCO

TELNO 2357

OF 27065OZ JULY 90

RESTRICTED

(76005560

MOHIAN 0383

HCD 341/1

жо

RECEIVED

02 AUG 1990

DESK OFFICER

INDEX

PA

Kok. luken

CHANGES IN THE IMMIGRATION RULES

1. WE HAVE RECEIVED A COMPLAINT FROM OMELCO ABOUT A HONG KONG TRAVELLER, MR

AU-YEUNG WHO HAS APPARENTLY LOST HIS SETTLED STATUS IN THE UK AS A CONSEQUENCE OF THE RECENT CHANGES MADE TO UK IMMIGRATION RULE 58. MR AU-YEUNG ARRIVED AT HEATHROW AIRPORT ON 12 JUNE 1990 AND WAS CLOSELY QUESTIONED AS REGARDS THE PURPOSE AND DURATION OF HIS VISIT TO THE UK. AS A RESULT, HE WAS ALLOWED TO STAY FOR SIX MONTHS ONLY AND NOT ALLOWED TO TAKE UP EMPLOYMENT IN THE UK. HE TELEPHONED FOR CLARIFICATION FROM THE HOME OFFICE ON 18 JUNE 1990 AND WAS ALLEGEDLY TOLD THAT HIS SETTLED STATUS HAD BEEN CANCELLED. CASE DETAILS ARE BEING FAXED TO YOU SEPARATELY.

2. THE DETAILED QUESTIONING OF MR AU-YEUNG AT THE PORT OF ENTRY APPEARS TO BE IN CONFLICT WITH THE HOME SECRETARY'S ASSURANCE AT THE HOUSE OF COMMONS ON 15 MAY 1990 THAT IMMIGRATION OFFICERS WOULD BE REMINDED NOT TO MAKE ANY FURTHER INQUIRIES ABOUT THE PLANS OF A PERSON GIVEN INDEFINITE LEAVE TO ENTER OR REMAIN. ON THE BASIS OF THE HOME SECRETARY'S ASSURANCE, WE HAVE ASSURED THE LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL THAT WE DID NOT EXPECT ANY CHANGE IN PRACTICE IN ADMITTING RETURNING RESIDENTS. CASES OF CANCELLATION OF SETTLED STATUS SUCH AS MR AU-YEUNG'S WOULD CALL INTO QUESTION THE ASSURANCES ALREADY GIVEN. GRATEFUL IF YOU COULD PASS THIS CASE TO THE HOME OFFICE AND SEEK THEIR ADVICE ON WHETHER THERE HAS IN FACT BEEN A CHANGE OF PRACTICE AND HOW SIMILAR CASES WOULD BE DEALT WITH IN FUTURE.

3. MR AU-YEUNG HAS ALSO ENQUIRED ABOUT CHANNELS FOR APPEAL. OUR UNDERSTANDING IS THAT UNDER RULE 93 OF THE UK IMMIGRATION RULES, MR AU-YEUNG MAY APPLY TO THE HOME OFFICE FOR VARIATION OF HIS LEAVE AND HAS A RIGHT OF APPEAL IF VARIATION IS REFUSED. UNFORTUNATELY, HE MERELY TELEPHONED THE HOME OFFICE FOR ENQUIRIES RATHER THAN APPLIED FOR VARIATION OF HIS LEAVE. WE ARE UNCLEAR AS TO WHETHER THE IMMIGRATION OFFICER CONCERNED HAD EXPLAINED THE PROVISIONS FOR REQUEST FOR VARIATION OF LEAVE AND APPEAL TO MR AU-YEUNG IN ACCORDANCE WITH RULE 93. IT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO FIND OUT WHETHER RULE 93 WAS ADHERED TO IN MR AU-YEUNG'S CASE.

•

THIS IS A COPY

THE ORIGINAL HAS BEEN

CLOSED UNDER

FOI EXEMPTION NO. 40 (2)

1

PAGE RESTRICTED