Our Norwegian correspondent The Observer has translated an article from Rights.no the “Norwegian” Labour Politician and virulent anti-Semite, Khalid Ahmed, who has made the cultural enrichment news here a couple of times previously. This latest story concerns a flock of Mr. Ahmed’s immigration fraud chickens belatedly coming home to roost.
The translator includes this explanatory note:
He rose to national fame in Norway after a vile exchange on Facebook in which he expressed strong anti-Semitic sentiments. Following this incident it was discovered that he had submitted false information in connection with his application for political asylum in 2002, and later on in his application for a Norwegian citizenship — which he was granted.
The really interesting aspect of this case is the fact that Khalid is a Norwegian citizen, and that the UDI intends to revoke his citizenship and deport him.
As far as I’m aware this has never happened before in Norway. Norwegian authorities have always made a point of being unable to do deport criminal immigrants if they hold Norwegian citizenship, so in that regard this indicates is a break from normal procedures in such cases.
The deportation order and the revocation of his citizenship could have repercussions for his closest kin who arrived in Norway on family reunification visas. They could be deported too, which is the only logical thing to do, considering that the authorities intend to deport Khalid.
Let’s follow this case and see what happens. This could create a legal precedent which might open some doors that so far have been kept firmly shut.
Note: Mr. Ahmed’s first name is sometimes spelled “Khalid”, and at other times “Khaled”.
The translated article:
Has initiated criminal proceedings against fraudster in the Labour Party
The Norwegian state has started criminal proceedings against former Labour politician Khaled Ahmed of Hamar. Khaled has also been served with a notice of deportation order and the revocation of his Norwegian citizenship.
Khaled Ahmed has applied for a leave of absence from his duties as an elected councilor in Hamar and Hedmark county (eastern part of Norway), and he has canceled his memberships in both the Labour Party and the AUF. Khaled ended up in the media spotlight last November following an anti-Semitic exchange on Facebook, which prompted Det Mosaiske trossamfunn [The Jewish congregation in Oslo] to file a complaint to the police. In an interview at the time with HA [local newspaper], Ahmed stated that he had only used youthful language.
And when Ahmed profusely apologized for his insensitive statements, the Labour Party in Hamar forgave him. One of the reasons why they chose to be so sympathetic may be surmised from the fact that Ahmed was on Utøya on July 22, 2011, and the fact that his younger brother was killed there.
But the tranquility didn’t last very long.
In early March of this year Ahmed was brought in for questioning by the police. He was interviewed and charged with perjury in connection with his application for political asylum and Norwegian citizenship. Yet again his friends came to his aid, and yet again the emphasis was on the Utøya link. However when Ahmed finally realized that he had been caught out, he decided to put all the cards on the table and tell everything to HA — and yet again he apologized profusely.
According to HA, the police had investigated him for almost six months before they eventually charged him with submitting incorrect information in connection with his asylum application in 2002. The state prosecutor in Oslo has now finished processing the indictment, and the prosecutor has decided to initiate criminal proceedings against him.
A few months in jail?
Ahmed’s lawyer, Eivor Øen, says that the case will probably be brought before the Hedmark County Court and that Ahmed intends to plead guilty.
According to HA, similar cases have resulted in prison sentences of between three to four months. There are, however, mitigating circumstances in this particular case that could lead to a reduced sentence on account of Ahmed’s confession. Ahmed has also gone on record saying that he is prepared to serve time in prison.
“I am prepared to pay for what I’ve done and I acknowledge that I deserve some type of reaction. That’s for the judge to decide. I will respect his decision.”
Ahmed’s primary concern, however, is not prison, but rather whether he’ll lose his Norwegian citizenship.
Lose his citizenship?
The Directorate of Immigration (UDI) has re-opened Ahmed’s case as a result of the criminal proceedings against him, and they have now served him with a notice of deportation from the Schengen area and the revocation of his Norwegian citizenship. In doing so the UDI sends out a signal that such a response could be imminent. Ahmed’s attorney Eivor Øen has been given four weeks to respond.
HA has previously written that Ahmed is aware of the possibility that he could lose his Norwegian citizenship, but that he intends to fight an eventual deportation order. If he is deported he will not be able to return to Norway under any circumstances for two years.
The big question is whether this decision will have consequences for Ahmed’s closest family who came to Norway on family reunification visas.
The case should have repercussions for both Ahmed and his family. They have submitted incorrect information in order to be able to stay in Norway, and they are consequently here on false grounds. The fact that Ahmed and his family are citizens of Djibouti, where Ahmed used to work as a teacher, would also tend to suggest that they are in no need of political asylum in Norway. To be honest, one can’t help but think that Djibouti may benefit more from Ahmed’s presence than Norway.
Another thing worth keeping in mind is that before Ahmed arrived in Norway he had spent time in France, Italy and Sweden. If a (real) political asylum application is to be filed, it should be filed in the first port of call. Ahmed also relied on the services of people-smugglers to get to Norway, which he has previously admitted cost him US $4,000. Thus he has contributed financially to organized crime, which constitutes a serious threat for the public.
If it is supposed to be that easy to get to stay in Norway, by simply submitting incorrect information, and if this dishonesty isn’t supposed to have any real consequences, then the institution of political asylum is meaningless. With the risk of being perceived as insensitive, I would like to venture that the decision to deport of Ahmed and family is the correct one.
For a complete listing of previous enrichment news, see The Cultural Enrichment Archives.