Last week, Jamaican dancehall star, Vybz Kartel (real name, Adidja Palmer) was released from prison, after his 2014 murder conviction was quashed. Kartel was serving a life sentence for the 2011 murder of Clive Williams, with the stipulation that he would not be eligible for parole until serving a minimum of 35 years.
The UK's Privy Council, the highest appellate court for Jamaica, overturned the conviction earlier in 2024, citing evidence of juror misconduct during the original trial. Specifically, it was found that a juror had attempted to bribe other members of the jury to sway the verdict, which undermined the fairness of the trial.
The Jamaican authorities subsequently decided not to pursue a retrial, considering various factors including Kartel's declining health, the difficulty in securing witnesses, and concerns about potential bias in a new trial. As a result, he was released after spending more than a decade in prison.
Assuming Kartel intends to make a full return to the entertainment industry, with possible tours in his future, we now look at the implications of his criminal history should he decide to come to the UK:
First and foremost, it is assumed that Kartel only has Jamaican citizenship, which makes him a ‘visa national' for the purposes of the UK's Immigration Rules. This means that the following paragraph applies to him:
24. The following persons are required to obtain entry clearance in advance of travel to the UK:
(i) a visa national;
(ii) a non-visa national (not a British or Irish national) who is seeking entry for any purpose other than as a visitor seeking entry for 6 months or less, or
(iii) a British national without the right of abode who is seeking entry for a purpose for which prior entry clearance is required under these Rules.
Kartel would, therefore, need to obtain a UK visa for any purpose in accordance with paragraph 24(i) above. Under the Immigration Rules for visitors, Kartel could apply for a Standard Visitor Visa to give performances in the UK, permitted he was not intending to remain in the country for more than 6 months.
Now we need to look at the guidance regarding grounds for refusal in relation to ‘suitability' criteria, which states the following:
Convictions and sentences varied on appeal
The outcome of such variation may be the quashing of the original conviction, or an increase or decrease in the length of the custodial sentence…
Where a person is acquitted, you must treat it as if there was never a conviction, although you may still consider the circumstances that led to charges being brought, which may support a refusal on non-conducive grounds. If an appeal changes a sentence but the person nevertheless remains convicted of the offence, you must take into account the new or revised sentence when assessing their application.
The guidance therefore suggests that although the conviction has been quashed, an applicant for a Standard Visitor Visa may still be subject to scrutiny and could still have their application refused under Part 9 of the Immigration Rules:
Non-conducive grounds
9.3.1. An application for entry clearance, permission to enter, or permission to stay must be refused where the applicant's presence in the UK is not conducive to the public good because of their conduct, character, associations or other reasons (including convictions which do not fall within the criminality grounds).
There is, therefore, still a very real risk of refusal should Kartel seek to apply for a Standard Visitor Visa to come to the UK because of the crime he was accused and convicted of, despite the sentence being quashed. This is a subjective assessment carried out by the UK government, and very strong representations would be required on Kartel's behalf should he wish to proceed with an application.
Would it be different if Kartel sought to enter the UK under the Immigration Rules relating to eligible family members?
The answer to this question is, maybe. It has been reported in the media that Kartel is engaged to a British citizen, who previously resided in the UK. Should he wish to start a new life in the UK with his fiancée, he could make an application under Appendix FM of the Immigration Rules, which contains a paragraph similar to that used in Part 9 above:
S-EC.1.5. The exclusion of the applicant from the UK is conducive to the public good because, for example, the applicant's conduct (including convictions which do not fall within paragraph S-EC.1.4.), character, associations, or other reasons, make it undesirable to grant them entry clearance.
Should Kartel fall foul of the paragraph above, a strong Human Rights based argument would need to be made on his behalf, citing possible reasons as to why he and his fiancée could not continue to live in Jamaica together.
The Immigration Rules relating to criminal convictions and reasons for refusal have become tougher in recent years. It is therefore becoming more common for detailed representations and extensive supporting documents to be included with visa applications, in order to reduce the risk of refusal and avoid the need to proceed to an appeal or request a judicial review.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.