Gurkhas win high court case

A group of veteran Gurkhas have won their immigration test case to settle in the UK at London’s High Court.

An estimated 2,000 Gurkhas—Nepalese soldiers who fought for the British Crown—had been refused visas to settle in the UK on the basis that they retired from the regiment before 1997. However, on September 30, High Court judge, Mr Justice Blake ruled that those veterans had been treated unlawfully.

Martin Howe, the human rights lawyer representing the Gurkhas, said it was “a tremendous and historic victory.”

Mr Howe greeted the ruling on the court steps amongst hundreds of Gurkha veterans and supporters, including Joanna Lumley, whose father served with the brigade of Gurkhas for 30 years.

Mr Howe continued: “It is a victory for common sense; a victory for fairness; and a victory for the British sense of what is 'right'.”

“My clients, and the thousands of Gurkhas standing behind them, ask for nothing more from this country than the unfettered right to live amongst the British people – a people they have protected and loved throughout years of long and loyal service to the crown.”

On 16 and 17 September, five Gurkha veterans and a regimental widow appeared at London’s High Court to challenge the government’s refusal to grant them entry visas on the grounds that they had “no strong ties” to the UK.

The case, which had taken nearly two years to come to court, was representative of an estimated 2,000 Gurkhas who had been refused residency on similar grounds.

The Gurkha legal team argued that the veterans, despite a distinguished record of service and dedication, had been discriminated against under Race Relation Act 8 and Article 14 of the European Convention which bars discrimination on the grounds of race, colour and national or social origin.

Last year, a government review allowed Gurkhas to apply to settle under a policy known as the Armed Forces Concession, which gives a soldier serving with the British army the right to settle in the UK after four years of service anywhere in the world.

However, for Gurkhas alone, the policy stated that the veterans were not eligible if they had retired before July 1, 1997.

The government argued that, even though the Nepalese Gurkhas have fought with the British Army, they had not developed close enough ties with Britain since they retired before the regimental headquarters moved to the UK from Hong Kong in 1997

Arguing that the policy used to reject them was misleading, Mr Justice Blake ruled that the Ministry of Defence’s advice on whether to grant settlement resulted in “irrational and unlawful” restrictions being applied.

The law was “so unclear as to permit conflicting decisions”. It failed to take into account years served, whether injuries were inflicted and whether medals of valour, including the Victoria Cross, were won.

The Nepalese Gurkhas, whose motto is “better to die than to live a coward”, have served the British crown since 1815 and became part of the British army following Indian independence in 1947.

The brigade has suffered 45,000 casualties during the two World Wars and other conflicts. They have been recognised for their bravery and strength, having won more Victoria crosses than any other regiment.

The Home Office Secretary, Jacqui Smith said she would revise its guidance surrounding the 1997 cut-off date:

“I have always been clear that where there is a compelling case, soldiers and their families should be considered for settlement. We will honour our commitment to the Gurkhas by reviewing all cases by the end of the year.”