British politics is theatrical at the best of times. They’re dealing with cat-gate at the moment, so it just became even more theatrical. A judge has actually ruled that an illegal immigrant could avoid deportation partly because the judge feared separating him from his pet cat and partner risked “serious emotional consequences”.

It’s been revealed that the Bolivian not only argued that he would suffer from being separated from his cat, but also that his pet’s quality of life would be affected.

The British home secretary, Theresa May, lambasted the judge’s ruling and has suggested that the nanny state abolishes their Human Rights Act altogether.

Yesterday, David Cameron publicly sided with her after she had come under criticism for her public attack, and appeared to mock the Justice Secretary for being on the side of criminals.

This is the quote from Theresa May that started cat-gate:

[There is an] illegal immigrant who cannot be deported because – and I am not making this up – he had a pet cat.

The quote was quickly rebutted by immigration lawyers and experts, who pointed out that the existence of the cat was taken as evidence of a foreign national’s long-term relationship with a British national and not the full reason for the judgement.

And thus, under Article eight of the British Human Rights Act – the right to a private and family life – Immigration Judge James Devitte allowed the Bolivian to stay in Britain.

Mrs May then enjoyed a public spat with Justice Secretary, Ken Clarke in the aftermath of her comments about the case, with the justice secretary offering a bet that her assertion was untrue.

Downing Street has backed Mrs May.

Excerpts from Judge Devitte’s ruling:

In 2005 the appellant and his partner acquired a cat, whom they called Maya and who has lived with them since that date. Although you have a cat called Maya she is considered to be able to adapt to life abroad with her owners.

While your cat’s material quality of life in Bolivia may not be at the same standard as in the United Kingdom, this does not give rise to a right to remain in the United Kingdom. The evidence concerning the joint acquisition of Maya by the appellant and his partner reinforces my conclusion on the strength and quality of the family life that [the] appellant and his partner enjoy.

In Canada and to a much lesser extent in the United States there is an increasing recognition of the significance that pets occupy in family life and of the potentially serious emotional consequences pet owners may suffer when some unhappy event terminates the bond they have with a pet.

The Canadian courts have moved away from the legal view that animals are merely chattels, to a recognition that they play an important role in the lives of their owners and that the loss of a pet has a significant emotional impact on its owner.

So while the cat wasn’t the only reason for the judge’s ruling, it certainly had some influence, and that is what makes for ludicrous political spats.

The Bolivian, who first arrived as a student in 2002, then overstayed his two-year visa, and was arrested for shoplifting in 2007 but was never charged over the shoplifting allegations.

[Source: DailyMail]