The government is being forced to reassess its policy on deportation to Zimbabwe after a failed asylum seeker won his appeal.

The Asylum and Immigration Tribunal ruled that the man, who cannot be named, would be at risk of harm if returned to Robert Mugabe’s regime.

Tribunal chairman Mark Ockleton criticised the government’s lack of research into conditions for those deported to the southern African country, and said that although the unnamed man had lied to immigration officials, he would be at risk if returned home.

In the ruling he said: "The fact that the appellant made a false claim, so generating the risk which would otherwise not have existed, does not alter the fact that the real risk of serious harm exists now. He has a well-founded fear of persecution."

Refugee groups welcomed the ruling and said the 140-plus failed asylum seekers from Zimbabwe the government was trying to deport could now feel "reasonably secure".

The Home Office said it was disappointed, and would be considering whether forcible deportations to Zimbabwe, which it halted pending today’s ruling, could be continued.

Campaigners have long claimed that people returned from the UK by the government are regarded as "spies" and "traitors" by the Mugabe regime.

The tribunal criticised the Home Secretary for his department’s research into conditions in Zimbabwe for those it deported, and for the lack of evidence uncovered by a fact-finding delegation sent by the Government in September.

Mr Ockleton said that the Home Secretary "ceased to have any very clear interest in what happened" once individuals had been returned to the Zimbabwean authorities, a situation he described as "alarming". He said: "Despite the facilities available to the investigation and the level at which it was conducted, it reveals nothing of the actual process which returned asylum-seekers go through on their arrival at Harare Airport."

He added that it was "exceedingly surprising" the Home Secretary failed to trace individuals who had already been returned.

The tribunal acknowledged that the appellant, who can only be identified as AA, had "become a refugee entitled to all the benefit that that status carries by making a false claim to be a refugee".

AA had falsely claimed to officials that he was a member of the opposition party MDC, but was unable to name senior members of the party or even say what the initials stood for.

But Mr Ockleton said the case did not rest on his original eligibility for asylum, but on the dangers he would face if returned.

He added: "We fear that our decision, based as it is firmly on the evidence we have heard and legal principles that are binding on us, will seem to demonstrate our concern that refugee law is inherently prone to abuse."

Tim Finch of the Refugee Council welcomed the ruling. He said: "(The tribunal) made some devastating comments about the cavalier way in which the Government treat failed asylum seekers by putting them on the plane, withholding their documents and not really caring what happens to them at the other end.

"The outcome is that failed asylum seekers from Zimbabwe end up being questioned by Mugabe’s security forces, who are deeply nasty people."

The government has refused to reveal how many Zimbabweans in this country are facing deportation. During the summer around 140 failed asylum seekers being held in detention centres took part in a hunger strike to force the government to stop the deportations.

The Home Secretary was then asked by Mr Justice Collins to postpone the deportations until evidence of abuse being meted out to those returned had been investigated. This prompted the government’s fact-finding mission to Zimbabwe - which was criticised by the tribunal.

Outside the court today failed asylum seeker Noble Sibanda, 29, who was forced to flee his home in Zimbabwe, said he hoped the ruling meant Britain would become a "safe haven".

He added: "All we’re asking for is sanctuary and time to regroup so that we can take care of the mess in our country. We hope Britain will now offer that support and that this will be an example to other countries around the world where our fellow Zimbabweans have sought asylum."

David Davis, the Shadow Home Secretary, said the tribunal’s decision had been necessary given the "abject failure" of the government’s Zimbabwe policy. He said: "We have always maintained that, until we have a rigorous method of monitoring the continuing safety of those returned to Zimbabwe, there should be a temporary moratorium on deportations."

A spokesman for the Home Office said: "We are disappointed with today’s determination. The tribunal has decided that, unlike claimants from every other country, the individual merits of Zimbabwean asylum claims do not count when assessing whether it would be safe for them to return to Zimbabwe.

"Our view remains that only on the basis of such individual consideration can we be confident that the correct decisions are taken - whether that decision is to grant asylum or to refuse it."

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• UK regional accents thrive against the odds
• ‘Scarecrow’ wind farms put rare birds to flight
• What an anti-climax: G-spot is a myth