Filipina Worker Barred by High Court to Remain in Hong Kong

There are many reasons why people work overseas. While others do it to help their families, some do it to escape a life they do not wish to have.

ALSO READ: High Court Bars Stay of Filipino Moms in HK

Whatever the case is for an individual to fly overseas, it’s important to keep in mind that we need to undertake due process for staying in a country such as Hong Kong. If we do not have the legal right, as supported by official documents to stay in the country, then it’s as good as a confirmation that we could no longer stay or even insist to do so, even if we have personal reasons for this decision.

Filipina Worker Barred by High Court to Remain in Hong Kong
Credits: Wikimedia Commons

High Court Rejects Filipina’s Bid to Remain in Hong Kong

Such is the case when the High Court rejected a Filipina domestic worker’s bid to remain in Hong Kong, on account of safety from her husband whom she alleged to be threatening to kill her when he discovered that she had illicit affairs with an Indian and a Pakistani, as shared in a report by the Asia Times.

The Filipina worker, Gennelyn DD, had requested the court to review the Torture Claims Appeals Board decision, which denied her asylum application.  The applicant had married her husband in the Philippines, whom she described as an alcoholic since 2007, and had two children with him.

The Filipina left her husband in 2014, and moved to Hong Kong to work as a domestic worker. The woman claimed that her husband sent her Facebook messages from time to time but she ignored them. During this time, the Filipina started a relationship with an Indian man after arriving in Hong Kong.

However, by December 2014, the woman returned to the Philippines after her contract was terminated, but she did not go home. Her husband later found out that she had an affair with the Indian man and threatened to kill her if she went back to Hong Kong again.

Nevertheless, the woman still returned to Hong Kong on February 2015 as a domestic worker. She claimed that her husband continued to send her threats to keep her from continuing her relationship with a Pakistani in Hong Kong.

Once again, her contract was terminated on June 30, 2015, but she overstayed in the country for nine days before surrendering to the Immigration Department and filing an asylum bid.

However, the Immigration Department rejected her bid in August 2017 because there was no credible risk of torture, persecution, cruel or inhumane punishment, or threat to life against her. She also lost her appeal to the Torture Claims Appeal Board, which ruled that her case was only “a case of domestic violence.”

Upon review of her bid, Judge Lam noted that the adjudicator learned that the husband’s death threats were merely verbal and the applicant had never been physically mistreated, adding that the two had no contact with each other for a long time.

The judge also pointed out that the applicant could request for help from the Philippine government and she could also “relocate” to a different city in the Philippines where her husband could not get to her.

Leave a Comment