17 Oct 2023
Detention was lawful because the Director demonstrated a clear intention to remove, acted with diligence and expedition, there was no legal impediment to removal and the primary cause of delay was the applicant's persistent refusal to cooperate with re-entry formalities, making continued detention reasonable and not unlawful.
22 Sept 2023
The detention was lawful: the Director demonstrated reasonable diligence and expedition toward removal, the significant delay was attributable largely to the applicant's persistent refusal to cooperate with consular interview requirements, removal was imminent with a travel permit obtained and a repatriation flight booked, and the applicant's medical complaints did not amount to unlawfulness of continued detention; accordingly habeas corpus was dismissed.
25 Jul 2023
Detention remained lawful because the Director had acted with sufficient diligence to remove the Applicant, the principal delays were caused by the Applicant's own actions (request to lodge a subsequent claim and an out‑of‑time leave application), removal was imminent, and there was a substantial risk of absconding if released; accordingly the habeas corpus application was dismissed.
25 Aug 2022
Detention of the applicant was originally lawful under the Immigration Ordinance and, applying the Hardial Singh principles and balancing the relevant factors (272 days detention, priority accorded to the appeal to the Board, reasonable prospect of determination in the near future, the applicant's Interpol Red Notice and consular material indicating risk to the community, lack of convincing local ties and a high risk of absconding, and the Secretary/Director's reasonable diligence), continued detention for the immediately foreseeable future is reasonable and lawful; habeas corpus application…