An Albanian drug dealer has won an asylum case to stay in Britain as he has ‘learnt his lesson’.
Arlind Nabolli was considered a ‘serious threat to the public’ after he was caught by police dealing cocaine and cannabis. The 29-year-old was jailed for over two years because his crimes were not ‘isolated incidents’ and he was ‘in the habit’ of dealing drugs in Maidstone, Kent.
But now, an immigration judge has ruled that Nabolli can remain in the country because he has showed remorse. Nabolli told the asylum court that he has ‘learnt his lesson’ and he is now a ‘law-abiding’ delivery driver.
An immigration judge said his drug dealing was a ‘one-off’ because he hasn’t re-offended and granted him asylum. The Upper Tribunal of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber heard that Nabolli is an Albanian national who entered the UK in 2018, with his wife.
He was granted leave to remain for five years along with his wife, who is of Greek nationality. Just two years after being granted leave to remain, Nabolli was found guilty of drug offences with intent to supply and road traffic offences.
He was found in possession of 10 grams of cocaine and 30 grams of cannabis, together with cash and details of two money transfers to two people in Albania. The judge at the time believed that this was not an isolated incident because his Vauxhall was seen going into Maidstone, Kent, on multiple occasions and was deemed to be dealing drugs on these trips.
In January 2022, the Home Office issued a deportation notice to him because he had committed a ‘serious offence’ and was jailed for 33 months. Nabolli appealed on human rights grounds, but this was refused, and he then appealed the deportation order by claiming the offending was a ‘one-off’.
He claimed that he was not dealing drugs when he was caught in possession, but was a user of drugs and had been taking the substances to someone as a favour, for no financial gain. He said he did not appeal the original sentence from the judge because he said he was advised not to, as it could make his sentence longer.
Whilst in prison, he undertook rehabilitation from drugs and claimed that he would not be able to continue with the rehabilitation if he were deported to Albania. He said he had ‘learnt his lesson’ from the incident by taking full responsibility for his actions and said it was a ‘one-off’ incident.
He also said his wife and children had no intention of leaving the UK if he was deported, and he ‘could not bear to be separated from his partner and children’.
An Upper Tribunal judgement said: “[Nabolli] claims that his conduct does not constitute a genuine, present, and sufficiently serious threat affecting the fundamental interests of society…
“He claims that his deportation from the UK would be disproportionate as a matter of EU law given the length of residence, strength of connections he has with the UK and the fact that his offending behaviour was a one-off offence. He states that he has learnt his lesson and that he recognises the impact his offending behaviour has on his victims and has not re-offended since his release from prison in early April 2022.”
At the hearing, Upper Tribunal Judge Karim-ullah Khan ruled in his favour. Judge Khan said: “He lives with his wife and two young children and has obtained employment working part-time while sharing the childcare arrangements with his wife, who also works part-time.
“Significantly, there has been no continuation nor escalation in his offending. His lifestyle appears to be stable and firmly focused on his family life. Nabolli accepted that his prior offending was serious and that it was wrong which ever way it was viewed, clearly showing insight and maturity. He also denied that he was challenging the conviction.”
Arifa Ahmed, Senior Home Office Presenting Officer, argued that Nabolli had not re-offended because the threat of deportation was ‘hanging over him’ and that by characterising the offence as a ‘one-off’ he was failing to take responsibility for his actions.
But Judge Khan didn’t agree. “It is not so black and white”, the judge said. “Factually, [his] offending was a ‘one-off.’ There has been no escalation or continuation of his offending.
“Even though it is true that he has had the threat of deportation hanging over him, that does not in my view fully explain why he has not re-offended.
“I consider for the foregoing reasons, there is insufficient evidence to conclude that [Nabolli’s] conduct shows a propensity to re-offend, and therefore his conduct at this time does not constitute a genuine, present, and sufficiently serious threat affecting one of the fundamental interests of society. Accordingly, [his] appeal is allowed.”
