“In his case he has been granted asylum. I don't know the reasons but presumably he met the criteria by which we have to accept him as an asylum seeker.”
No he did not. He should not have been granted asylum or even had his case considered in the UK. As I keep saying, the UN convention on the treatment of refugees is quite clear. People such as this should be prosecuted as illegal entrants to the country. They only have immunity from such a charge in the first safe country in which they arrive. Few of them arrive directly from peril into the UK and this individual certainly did not. He was not in need of asylum and the UK is not, and has not for some time, been complying with the UN convention.
“I recall he may have to face a criminal charge first though- damaging the tunnel or similar”
That charge is now “under review” by the CPS in view of his changed status. Take this to mean that the charge will be ditched.