Bogus websites, staged protests and pretend atheists: Inside the fake asylum industry

Inside the Deceptive Asylum Industry

In a rapidly evolving landscape of migration strategies, individuals and advisors are resorting to fabricated evidence to support their asylum claims. From counterfeit news platforms to orchestrated demonstrations and invented religious identities, the methods employed create a web of deception. This forms a deceptive industry where migrants are charged for guidance on how to feign sexual orientation, as revealed in the initial phase of our covert investigation into the immigration system.

Uncovering the Tactics

During an evening session in early April at an office situated along the bustling Mile End Road in east London, our undercover reporter engaged in a session on asylum application strategies. Disguised as a Bangladeshi university dropout contemplating staying in the UK, he was taught by Zahid Hasan Akhand, who claimed to be a barrister, how to manipulate the Home Office. Akhand outlined three possible paths: persecution based on sexual orientation, religious beliefs, or political views. He assured that the legal side would be managed, while the individual would need to choose their narrative—whether pretending to be gay, an atheist, or a political activist.

“For gay cases, it’s private, but politics and atheism are public,” Akhand said. “So establishing that is a bit difficult.”

Akhand emphasized the need for evidence to corroborate the claims. For a £1,500 fee, he promised assistance with applications and mock interviews. However, additional costs of £2,000 to £3,000 were required for fabricated proof. If the reporter opted to claim atheism, he would be directed to create social media posts critical of Islam and the Prophet Muhammad, with clerics supposedly issuing threats. “Religious clerics will start making comments threatening to kill you. Then you will see that your evidence has been created,” Akhand explained.

He also suggested using AI tools like ChatGPT to generate articles for atheist publications, thereby enhancing credibility. The undercover reporter was advised to attend gatherings for former Muslims, as “this is not the age of posts anymore, it is the age of live videos.” Akhand proposed a narrative: “You would say that you became an atheist after coming here. You were not one in Bangladesh.” He even hinted that the posts could be written under a pseudonym.

For the gay claim, evidence would involve fake club memberships and a staged partner who would provide a letter affirming the relationship. “If you go to those associations, you will not get caught out. Most of the people there are not gay,” Akhand noted. When asked about past cases where the applicant’s authenticity was questionable, he replied, “Everyone is being successful, God willing. If you listen and get the evidence arranged properly, it will be successful.”

Akhand, who qualified as a barrister in 2022, lacks a licensing to practice, indicating a potential oversight in the system. His approach highlights how easily fabricated stories can be weaponized to navigate complex immigration processes, raising concerns about the integrity of asylum evaluations.