Liverpool attack: Anglican Church in storm, ‘easy conversions for asylum seekers’

The Anglican Church is at the center of the controversy over the alleged ‘easy’ conversions granted to asylum seekers of Islamic faith, who would use this ploy to have a better chance of getting their applications accepted by the British authorities. This is the case of the suicide bomber from Liverpool, Emad al-Swealmeen, who would have converted to avoid expulsion from the country. According to the Telegraph, Interior Minister Priti Patel would be baffled by the “joust” of hasty conversions and other tactics used by asylum seekers destined for expulsion, who in this way present “appeal upon appeal” to the courts to remain in Great Britain. Among the reasons why expulsion can be avoided there is in fact the risk that in one’s country of origin one may be persecuted for religious reasons and a Muslim converted to Christianity may be subject to reprisals by the authorities of his own country. or their community of origin. The UK Home Office believes that the change of religion is now a “common practice” among asylum seekers to “make fun of the system”. After Sunday’s attack in front of the Women’s Hospital in Liverpool, which fortunately caused no casualties apart from the bomber, it emerged that the 32-year-old Iraqi-born al-Swealmeen had been helped by the Chesa Anglicana to avoid deportation, after that his asylum application had been rejected in 2014. After this first request, al-Swealmeen converted to Christianity at the end of a five-week course in Liverpool Cathedral and later filed a series of appeals to avoid deportation to Iraq. One such legal process was ongoing when the 32-year-old launched his terrorist attack on Sunday. Thousands of asylum seekers have been converted to Anglicanism in recent years. The clergy of the Church of England has even drawn up a guide to orient these new ‘faithful’ within the system of procedures of the Ministry of the Interior. Too much for Minister Patel, who accused asylum seekers and their lawyers of deliberately “exploiting” the British system to stay in the country, “at the expense of the taxpayers”.