Albanian burglar deported for FIFTH time – as Mail wins fight to stop serial criminal from keeping his name secret
Dorian Puka, a 32-year-old Albanian man jailed four times for burglary and deported each time, faces deportation from Britain for a fifth time. A judge removed an anonymity order after a newspaper argued that Puka had publicly shared a video filmed inside an immigration tribunal building, undermining his claim that revealing his location put him at risk.
Puka first entered the UK illegally in 2012 or 2013, according to court documents, and repeatedly returned after deportation. His prison sentences included terms of nine months, two months, 42 months and 18 months, alongside convictions for theft and driving offences. He said he returned because he feared for his safety in Albania; his asylum claim was rejected in 2024, and he appealed.
- Puka faces deportation from Britain for a fifth time.
- He was jailed four times and returned illegally after each deportation.
- A judge lifted his anonymity after he shared tribunal footage.
New here? Start with this
The UK can remove someone who has no legal right to remain, including after an asylum claim is refused. A person may appeal that decision, and a tribunal hears evidence before deciding whether removal can go ahead.
Dorian Puka is an Albanian national who has repeatedly been convicted of burglary and returned to the UK after earlier deportations. He has said he fears for his safety if sent back to Albania; his asylum claim was refused in 2024, and he appealed.
An anonymity order prevents a person’s name or identifying details from being made public. Courts can lift such an order if they conclude that the reasons for keeping someone anonymous no longer justify it.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Publishing his name can support open justice and public accountability, particularly when a person repeatedly re-enters the country after serious convictions and challenges deportation. The newspaper argued that Puka’s own public sharing of tribunal footage weakened the case for concealing his identity and location.
The case against
Anonymity can protect a person who credibly fears harm if identified, and removing it may expose them to risks even when their asylum claim has been rejected. Repeated offending and deportation proceedings do not by themselves settle whether public identification is necessary or proportionate while an appeal is under way.