Case No. UKUT-00286-(IAC)

16. The appellant’s work is not disputed by the respondent. However, the issue arises as to whether the applicant is, in effect, irreplaceable. If he is not absolutely irreplaceable, the respondent contends the appellant and the AICC have failed to establish he cannot be replaced for all reasonable and practical purposes. 17. The Secretary of State relies upon the appellant’s poor immigration history and the public interest in the removal of those who have flouted immigration law, the fact that the Immigration Rules permit ministers of religion (a wide-ranging term that would include the appellant) to enter the United Kingdom lawfully and that there are in any event some 56,000 Afghans in the United Kingdom as a potential source of recruitment for an individual to replace him. She points out that there has been no extensive national or international effort at recruitment. Further, the respondent noted that the appellant’s educational background is limited: he arrived in the United Kingdom at the age of 17 or 18 and had only previously received 3½ years study at a Madrasa.