§ Mr. Redmond
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the error made by his Department in deporting the wrong Paul Brown to Kingston, Jamaica; what steps he has made in contacting him and informing him of his Department's error; what has been the result of the appeal made by the other Paul Brown; and what steps he has made to ensure such an error cannot recur.
§ Mr. Peter Lloyd
[holding answer 22 April 1991]A Mr. Paul Brown was removed to Jamaica on 7 July 1989 in the mistaken belief that he was subject to a deportation order which had been made against another person of the same name. Both men were Jamaican, both had been convicted of offences, and both had been recommended for deportation by a court. The Paul Brown removed on 7 July 1989 made no representations against his removal. If he wished to return to the United Kingdom he would have to qualify for entry under the immigration rules. Those rules provide that where a passenger has been convicted of an offence included in the list of extradition crimes leave to enter is to be refused unless the immigration officer considers admission to be justified for strong compassionate reasons. Mr. Brown had been so convicted and no steps have been taken to trace him in Jamaica.343W
The other Paul Brown was deported on 4 July 1990. He did not exercise his right of appeal to the higher court against his conviction or against the recommendation for deportation. The circumstances which led to the confusion of the two identities was most unusual and unlikely to recur. Nevertheless, magistrates courts have been asked to provide the person's date of birth and nationality when notifying my Department of a court recommendation. The Lord Chancellor's Department will be making similar arrangements for the Crown courts.