Critics argue a recent legal decision has failed to hold accountable a former official linked to past migration controversies, labeling it a case of "selective justice." Advocacy groups representing affected individuals have condemned the ruling for allegedly overlooking systemic failures while clearing the way for the exoneration of a key figure. The backlash highlights deep divisions over accountability in high-profile cases where public trust has already been eroded. Supporters of the decision may face growing pressure to address broader concerns about fairness and transparency in legal proceedings.
Victims' groups, however, have denounced the ruling as 'selective' justice that exonerates the former migration chief.
