A Syrian migrant who fled to Britain after being convicted of sexually assaulting a schoolgirl in Germany is now fighting his deportation by invoking his human rights, a court has heard.
From German Convict to UK Asylum Seeker
Azizadeen Alsheikh Suliman, 31, was living in Germany when he sexually assaulted a 15-year-old girl in Osnabrück in 2022. Following an alcohol-fuelled night out, he approached the teenager, asked for a light, and exchanged Instagram details. German court documents state he then touched her bare stomach under her crop top, gave her half a gram of cannabis, and attempted to kiss her.
When she rejected him, he blocked her path and, against her will, touched her chest and bottom over her clothing before trying to pull down her trousers. The victim, who held onto her clothing with both hands, was unable to prevent Suliman from indecently touching her and exposing himself.
He was later traced via Instagram, convicted of sexual assault and supplying drugs to a minor, and given a suspended prison sentence. After becoming unemployed and stopping court-ordered payments, facing the reactivation of his sentence and possible imprisonment, he fled.
A New Life Funded by the Taxpayer
Suliman crossed the English Channel by boat and claimed asylum in the UK. Upon arrival, he gave a false spelling of his name. Along with his wife—a fellow asylum seeker he married in Nigeria—and their newborn son, he was placed in taxpayer-funded accommodation at the Britannia Ashley Hotel in Hale, Cheshire, an upmarket suburb known as 'millionaires' row'.
His stay there sparked local fury, with the council, police, and MP complaining they were kept 'in the dark'. The hotel had previously been branded the 'most obviously inappropriate location' for housing migrants by then-local MP Sir Graham Brady.
His past caught up with him when the German authorities issued a European Arrest Warrant. He was detained by the National Crime Agency at the hotel on October 17, 2025.
The Fight to Stay: Tribal Feuds and Family Life
At an extradition hearing at Westminster Magistrates' Court, Suliman argued that deporting him to Germany would breach his human rights. His defence claimed his life would be at risk from a tribal feud that had spilled over from Syria into Germany, stating rival family members were seeking revenge for past killings.
His pregnant wife, who testified wearing a burgundy burqa, said she was wholly reliant on him and would have to follow him to Germany if he were sent back, as she had no one to help her in the UK. His lawyer, Sophia Kerridge, argued extradition could breach his Article 8 right to a family life under the European Convention on Human Rights.
However, lawyers for the German authorities dismissed his fears as not standing up to scrutiny. Miriam Smith noted it 'can’t be a coincidence' he gave a different name spelling and warned the UK risked becoming a 'safe haven' for foreign criminals. She added that if extradited, he could still live with his family at public expense in Germany.
Political Outrage and Systemic Failures
The case has ignited fierce political debate about the UK's asylum system and border controls. Robert Jenrick, who recently defected to Reform UK, told the Daily Mail: 'This despicable individual needs to be kicked out of the country immediately... Disgusting cases like this will only end when we leave the ECHR.'
Local Conservative council leader Nathan Evans said the case confirmed 'there are virtually no checks,' arguing that proper fingerprinting and database checks could have prevented it. Alp Mehmet of Migration Watch UK stated that international agreements should not take precedence over the safety of British citizens.
The Home Office responded, stating: 'We will not allow foreign criminals and illegal migrants to exploit our laws... This government deported almost 5,200 foreign national offenders in its first year in office.'
Suliman, who was remanded in custody, awaits a final decision on his extradition on January 19. The judge must now determine whether deporting him to face justice in Germany would constitute a breach of his human rights.
