By Evarist Baimu Nyaga Mawalla - Home

Paris at 7. 45 pm. The plane on which M was to continue his flight was not due toleave until 1020 pm.Prior to Ms departure from Paris, numerous discussions took place betweenofficials of the Home Office, a member of Parliament who was intervening on M’sbehalf, his new solicitor and subsequently Mr. Peter Loyd, the ParliamentaryUnder Secretary of State to the Home Office (the Minister). The conversationwhich took place revealed a considerable confusions as to what was the precisesituation. The Home Office officials and the minister were under the impressionthat the judge, who edentity they did not know. Wanted M to be returned. Theview was taken that it would not be appropriate to intervene in Paris, but it wasdecided that the judge should be informed about the situation. The Home Officeofficials were not able to contact a presentative of the Treasury Solicitor and infact although subsequently, the identify of the judge was ascertained togetherwith his telephone number, no one contacted him on behalf of the Home Office.No action was taken by the Home Office to prevent M leaving Paris and at 10.40pm the aircraft carrying M and his escort departed from Paris. It is accepted thatat that time the minister was ignorant of any undertaking as opposed to aninformal request being given by the Home Office until it was too late to havesecured M’s return from Paris.At about 11.20 pm M.s solicitor telephoned Garland I at his home and informedhim what had happened and that, on M’s case, he would be exposed to a graverisk of persecution on his arrival in Zaire. Garland I then made a mandatory orderon the telephone requiting the Home Secretary to return M to this country. The548