UK-Nigerian Visa Official Found Guilty of Misconduct

A senior immigration officer is facing a lengthy jail term after he admitted illegally issuing 'scores' of visas to immigrants, granting them indefinite leave to remain in the UK.

Samuel Shoyeju, 53, abused his position as an entry clearance officer for the UK Border Agency by allowing African nationals to avoid the normal application process.

The visas enabled those who received them – mainly Nigerians – to live and work in Britain.

A Crown Prosecution Service source said: 'We think most of the people who received the visas will never be traced. They've slipped through the net for good.'

A court heard yesterday there was evidence Shoyeju had received tens of thousands of pounds in cash payments in his bank accounts.

But it is understood it would be difficult to prove where the money came from and six charges, including money laundering offences, were dropped against the married father-of-three, who lives in Canvey Island, Essex.

Shoyeju admitted a charge of wilful misconduct by granting indefinite leave to remain to non-EU nationals who did not qualify under immigration laws.

The offence, which carries a maximum jail term of ten years, related to 'scores' of visas handed out before April 30, 2008, Basildon Crown Court heard.

Shoyeju, who worked at the agency's headquarters in Croydon, South London, was remanded in custody and is not expected to be sentenced until the conclusion of a trial of a co-defendant.

Judge Christopher Mitchell said: 'He's facing a substantial period in custody.'

'The UK Border Agency expects the highest levels of integrity, behaviour and professionalism from its workforce and we take any allegations of abuse very seriously,' a spokesman said. 'If someone is believed to have committed a crime, they will be prosecuted.'

Prosecutor Lucy Kennedy said there was documentary evidence of vast sums of money being paid into Shoyeju's account. 'There is an inference to be drawn in that Mr Shoyeju did receive funds,' she added.

'The fact is we do not know why he was doing it. For the purposes of sentencing the Crown says the most critical point is the vast breach of trust.'

But Stephen Linehan QC, defending, said: 'My case has always been that he did not do this for money – there is absolutely no doubt about it. 'The defendant's case is “I did put that money in my account. It was not criminal property”.'

Few details were given about the case during the brief hearing.

The case comes as the UK Border Agency is already engulfed in separate controversy over claims it went beyond the terms of a pilot scheme to relax border checks.

Immigration officers were informed secretly to relax checks on biometric chips on the passports of thousands of people from outside the European Union, it is claimed.

Staff were also told not to check fingerprints and other personal details against a database containing the names of terror suspects and immigrants who posed a risk to the public.