A video that appeared on The Guardian website yesterday does a number of things that we, in Leicester and the East Midlands, are also working on.
The video starts with Benedict Cumberbatch reading 'Home', a poem that talks about why people leave home and why they are using the Mediterranean to try and find places of safety.
The poem reminds me of Momodou Sallah's "Barca or Berserk". It also reminds me of "Poems for People", an anthology of poems and short fiction that Poets in Solidarity with Refugees are currently working on.
The Crowded House song, "Help is Coming", reminds me that in Leicester, a significant number of musicians, singers and songwriters are currently looking at producing a musical recording and at staging a concert in solidarity with refugees.
Both the Poets in Solidarity with Refugees and the Musicians in Solidarity with Refugees initiatives also aim to support the men, women and children who are in Calais as well as those who are using the Mediterranean in an effort to find places of safety. The initiatives also aim to raise funds for groups that work with refugees and asylum seekers.
Showing posts with label refugees. Show all posts
Showing posts with label refugees. Show all posts
Saturday, 12 September 2015
Tuesday, 7 January 2014
UK is two-faced over Syrian war
UKIP leader Nigel Farage, of all people, has called on Britain to honour the spirit of the 1951 Refugee Convention and accept Syrian refugees and accord them protection.
David Cameron and his Government have rejected these calls and Farage (as is to be expected) has since gone on to muddy the waters by suggesting that Britain should only afford protection to Syrian Christians who are fleeing the conflict.
I am aware that, were it not for the fact that – for the first time in a very long time – members of parliament in Britain actually listened to their constituents and roundly rejected and defeated Cameron's plans to unleash the British military arsenal on Syria, British troops would be causing more death and destruction in Syria right now.
It is shameful that Britain should be this two-faced.
On the one hand, as evidenced by the intensity with which Cameron and William Hague were beating the war drums, Britain appears to have no qualms about adding to the carnage in Syria.
And yet, on the other hand, the Government is extremely reluctant and unwilling to give refuge to those Syrians who are fleeing the guns, the violence, the death and the destruction that has plagued their country from the time the conflict started until now.
Cameron and his Government need to look again at how they are conducting themselves in relation to the Syrian conflict and the refugees that the conflict is producing.
The Government needs to do more to support those countries that are sheltering and protecting the most Syrian refugees.
It also needs to give refugee status to more Syrian nationals who have managed to reach Britain and who have submitted asylum applications.
Anything less is immoral, totally unacceptable and wrong.
*This article first appeared in the Leicester Mercury's letters page on 4 january 2014.
David Cameron and his Government have rejected these calls and Farage (as is to be expected) has since gone on to muddy the waters by suggesting that Britain should only afford protection to Syrian Christians who are fleeing the conflict.
I am aware that, were it not for the fact that – for the first time in a very long time – members of parliament in Britain actually listened to their constituents and roundly rejected and defeated Cameron's plans to unleash the British military arsenal on Syria, British troops would be causing more death and destruction in Syria right now.
It is shameful that Britain should be this two-faced.
On the one hand, as evidenced by the intensity with which Cameron and William Hague were beating the war drums, Britain appears to have no qualms about adding to the carnage in Syria.
And yet, on the other hand, the Government is extremely reluctant and unwilling to give refuge to those Syrians who are fleeing the guns, the violence, the death and the destruction that has plagued their country from the time the conflict started until now.
Cameron and his Government need to look again at how they are conducting themselves in relation to the Syrian conflict and the refugees that the conflict is producing.
The Government needs to do more to support those countries that are sheltering and protecting the most Syrian refugees.
It also needs to give refugee status to more Syrian nationals who have managed to reach Britain and who have submitted asylum applications.
Anything less is immoral, totally unacceptable and wrong.
*This article first appeared in the Leicester Mercury's letters page on 4 january 2014.
Sunday, 24 February 2013
The 2nd UoL Refugee Week
The second University of Leicester Refugee Week starts on 25 February and runs till 3 March.
The purpose of the week is to raise awareness about what it means to be a refugee as well as to raise awareness about how refugees and asylum seekers are living in the United Kingdom and to raise funds for Leicester City of Sanctuary, a local charity that provides practical support to refugees and asylum seekers.
The week builds on the success of the first student-led Refugee Week that was held at the university last year and will see the university host a series of public events around issues relating to refugees and asylum seekers.
Programme Summary
February:
- 25: Panel Discussion/Debate on Gender, Sexuality and the Refugee Experience (speakers will include a practising solicitor; an academic; a social worker; and, a charity worker); Attenborough Lecture Theatre 3, University of Leicester, University Road, Leicester LE1 7RH; 6.00pm - 8.00pm
- 26: Society Event (Syria: Uprooted! a case study on the Syrian conflict with particular emphasis on how Syrians are being displaced, where they are going and how they are being received); Attenborough Seminar Room 002, University of Leicester; 6.00pm -8.00pm
- 27: An evening with the Zimbabwe Association Choir (feat. Film Screening, Leicester City of Sanctuary presentation, and a Zimbabwe Association Choir performance); University of Leicester, Attenborough Building, Attenborough Seminar Block, 2nd Floor, ATT 208; 4.00pm - 6.00pm
- 28: "Refugee Women’s Experiences in Fiction and Non-Fiction: a reading in two parts” feat. Dr Leah Bassel (University of Leicester, Department of Sociology) and Jonathan Taylor (poet, novelist and De Montfort University creative writing lecturer); University of Leicester, Attenborough Building, Attenborough Lecture Theatre 3; 6.00pm - 8.00pm
- 1: Networking Evening plus Red Leicester Choir; University of Leicester, Attenborough Building, Attenborough Seminar Room 001 ; 6.00pm – 8.00pm
- 2: 'Simple Acts' and fundraising
- 3: 'Simple Acts' and fundraising
Detailed Programme
Monday, February 25, 2013
"Gender, Sexuality and the Refugee Experience": Panel Discussion
Venue: University of Leicester, Attenborough Lecture Theatre 3
Time: 6.00pm - 8.00pm
- What is a refugee?
- What is an asylum seeker?
- How does a person become a refugee or an asylum seeker?
- Does a person's gender and/or sexual orientation have any bearing on whether a person can apply for asylum or not?
- What are some of the things that can be said about the manner in which the UK's immigration and asylum system responds to asylum applications that centre on questions of gender and/or sexual orientation?
- How easy or difficult is it to prove that one is a genuine asylum seeker?
- Does the asylum process have any effect on how individuals, families and/or communities live?
These and other questions will be the subject of the panel discussion that will take place on the first day of the 2nd University of Leicester Refugee Week.
Speaking at the event will be:
- Bushra Ali, Head of Immigration at Thaliwal Bridge Solicitors and recipient of the 2012 Leicestershire Law Society Solicitor of the Year Award as well as recipient of the 2012 Legal Aid Lawyer of the Year Award;
- Vanessa Bettinson, a lecturer at De Montfort University who is currently teaching on "Gender and Sexuality in Relation to Claims for Refugee Protection" in the final year Immigration & Refugee Law module at De Montfort University;
- Cathy Stevenson, a Refugee Services Manager with the British Red Cross in Leicester; and
- Jawaahir Daahir, Managing Director of Somali Development Service; co-editor of Somalia to Europe: Stories from the Somali Diaspora (Leicester Quaker Press, 2010), and a qualified social worker who worked with asylum seekers and refugees and their families for many years.
The panel discussion will be chaired by University of Leicester student, Max Beck who is also president of the Leicester United Nations Society.
The discussion will be followed by a Q&A session in which the panelists will take questions from the audience.
Tuesday, February 26, 2013
Syria: Uprooted! a presentation on the Syrian Conflict and Refugee Experience
Venue: University of Leicester, Attenborough Seminar Room 002
Time: 6.00pm -8.00pm
- How many people have been displaced as a result of conflict in Syria?
- Which parts of Syria are affected?
- What (if anything) do those who are being displaced have in common?
- Where are they going?
- What are they finding there?
- How are they being received?
- To what extent are things like gender, ethnicity and political and/or religious beliefs and practices playing a role in this displacement, migration, reception and settlement (or lack of)?
These and other questions will be the focus of Syria: Uprooted! a University of Leicester Politics and International Relations Society presentation on the Syrian conflict.
The presentation will pay particular attention to how Syrians are being displaced, where they are going and how they are being received. The presentation will also look at the extent to which factors like gender, ethnicity and political and/or religious beliefs and practices are playing a role in this displacement, migration, reception and settlement (or lack of).
The presentation will be followed by a Q&A session in which the University of Leicester Politics and International Relations Society will take questions from the audience on the presentation.
Wednesday, February 27, 2013
An evening with the Zimbabwe Association Choir
Venue: University of Leicester, Attenborough Building, Attenborough Seminar Block, 2nd Floor, ATT 208
Time: 4.00pm - 6.00pm
The evening will open with two short films that show some of the realities of life for asylum seekers in the United Kingdom.
This will be followed by a presentation from Pam Inder, who chairs Leicester City of Sanctuary, on the challenges refugees and asylum seekers face in the UK and the role individuals and voluntary sector organisations play in supporting refugees and asylum seekers.
The evening will culminate in a performance by members of the Zimbabwe Association Choir who will share some of their stories, music, song and dance. Many members of the choir are survivors who escaped persecution and violence in Zimbabwe.
Thursday, February 28, 2013
Refugee Women's Experiences in Fiction and Non-Fiction: A reading in two parts
Venue: University of Leicester, Attenborough Lecture Theatre 3
Time: 6.00pm - 8.00pm
- What are the causes of forced migration?
- How easy or difficult is it for refugees to find places where they can feel safe?
- If at all they do find such places of safety, is integration really possible or even desirable?
Two writers - one a poet and a novelist and the other a sociologist - will approach these or related questions from different perspectives and in different ways.
Dr Leah Bassel – a Sociology lecturer at the University of Leicester and the author of Refugee Women: Beyond Gender versus Culture (Routledge 2012) – will open the evening by giving a talk on migration and the politics of refugee women's integration.
She will be followed by Jonathan Taylor – a poet, novelist and a creative writing lecturer at De Montfort University – who will give a reading from his novel, Entertaining Strangers (Salt Publishing 2012).
The two presentations will be followed by a Q&A session in which the two writers will take questions from the audience.
Friday, March 1, 2013
Networking Evening: *plus Red Leicester Choir
Venue: University of Leicester, Attenborough Building, Attenborough Seminar Room 001
Time: 6.00pm - 8.00pm
This informal evening will bring together University of Leicester staff and students, members of the Leicester Migration Network, members of the public, refugees, asylum seekers and supporting organisations.
The Networking Evening will be a good opportunity to make connections or to develop and build on links with relevant individuals, groups and organisations.
The evening will culminate in a performance by the Red Leicester Choir which, as choir member, Jan Wild-Grant puts it, sings "songs of struggle, songs of freedom and songs for the fun of it" from all over the world.
Saturday, March 2, 2013
‘Simple Acts' and fundraising
Venue: Various
Time: Various
University of Leicester students are encouraged to continue supporting the UoL Refugee Week fundraising efforts and to do simple acts like learning a few facts about refugees and asylum seekers; writing a letter or an email about refugees and asylum seekers; having a conversation with a refugee or an asylum seeker ...
Sunday, March 3, 2013
'Simple Acts' and fundraising
Venue: Various
Time: Various
University of Leicester students are encouraged to continue supporting the UoL Refugee Week fundraising efforts and to do simple acts like learning a few facts about refugees and asylum seekers; writing a letter or an email about refugees and asylum seekers; having a conversation with a refugee or an asylum seeker ...
*For more information, visit the UoL Refugee Week facebook page or contact event organiser, Iqra Mazhir.
Wednesday, 3 January 2007
Britain's Child Prisoners
Zimbabwean civil rights activist Nellie de Jongh has been speaking to women "behind the wire" at Yarl's Wood Immigration Removal Centre and documenting their lives, the lives of their children, and the conditions under which they are all being kept.
Nellie de Jongh logs her visits and related information on the Web site of the National Coalition of Anti-Deportation Campaigns (NCADC), and e-mails an account of what she is seeing and hearing to a growing number of people.
The following narrative is based on her e-mails:
July 20, 2006
Aboubacar Bailey Junior was born on April 16, 2006, in Holloway prison. He served his first 79 days there, and then he was transferred to continue his indefinite sentence at Yarl's Wood. To date, he has served 15 days.
His crime, according to immigration law, is the immigration status of his parents.
Baby Aboubacar suffers from a skin condition that keeps him and his mom awake at night. Doctors are not very helpful because Aboubacar is, first and foremost, an illegal immigrant -- even before he can ever be a child.
At Yarl's Wood, babies are not getting enough to eat. They are suffering from loss of appetite and can hardly eat the food they are provided.
Halama, Aboubacar's mother, said he received better care at Holloway prison. There, breast-feeding mothers got an extra liter of milk in a flask for their babies every night. At Yarl's Wood, they are told there is no extra milk for breast-feeding mothers. They are told to drink a lot of water instead.
Halama said she believes the only reason their babies were treated better in prison was because British nationals were also housed there.
"At Immigration Removal centers we are all foreign nationals, that is why they don't care about our babies," Halama said.
Ayodele Micheal Ode was born on April 17, 2006. He, too, was born in prison and lived there for the first 22 days of his life, before being transferred to Yarl's Wood, where he continues to serve his extended prison sentence. What terrible crime did this baby commit to have already served 93 days in two prisons?
Leatitia Kakmeni Pameni was born on Oct. 12, 2003, and Stacy Leuni Singoue, on Feb. 23, 2005. They were both detained on May 11, 2006. To date, the two siblings have served 68 days in detention. Tomorrow, they will be deported to the Central African Republic.
Princess Solomon was born on Oct. 19, 1997, and Promise Solomon, on Jan. 6, 2004. The two sisters and their mother were detained on May 30, 2006. They have served 50 days in detention to date. Promise's identity card has the following information on the back: "This card is to be carried at all times while you are in the centre and handed in when you leave. The card must be produced on request to Officers to obtain access to the centre facilities."
Promise is two and a half years old. How can she comply with the instructions?
Promise is suffering from ill health. She has had nosebleeds for the past few days. According to Meggy, Promise's mother, the doctor has not been helpful and was unable to reassure her about either of her children's poor health. No thorough examination was carried out.
Meggy has resorted to holding Promise in her arms, over her shoulder, while she sleeps, as she has woken up on several occasions to find the child, her clothing, and her bedding covered in blood. Her worst fear is that Promise will choke to death if she lays her down to sleep.
Aliyah Benoni was born on the June 15, 2006, and is the youngest child on my list. Like Ayodele she, too, was born in prison where she served the first 15 days of her life. She was then transferred to Yarl's Wood on July 5, 2006. She continues to serve her indefinite sentence and has done 15 days. At time of writing, she is only 30 days old.
Molly Ssebatta was born on Oct. 5, 2001. She was detained on July 5, 2006 -- at 5:30 a.m. Molly's speech has been affected since detention. She has no appetite and refuses to eat most days. She wants to go back home, and she misses her friends. She had been detained for 15 days.
Adecokundo Taiwo was born on June 20, 2002, and Adeole Taiwo, on Jan. 13, 2005. They have both spent 15 days behind the wire. According to their mother, before they were snatched in one of the Home Office's infamous dawn raids, the two brothers had been to their doctor and were due for a review, as their doctor had said they had an infection. The mother was very distressed by the attitude of the doctors at Yarl's Wood, who have even turned down her request for Paracetomol. Mostly, the brothers want to know when they will be able to go back home, and to school, to do normal things again.
I am amazed at the courage of some of these parents. Most are fighting back in their own way with noncompliance. They get together, have discussions and meetings, and write letters to the authorities. Working with these women/parents has brought home to me just how terrible immigrants are treated in this country. The fact that innocent babies are born in prison and then transferred to immigration detention centers leaves me very angry indeed.
July 22, 2006
Prisca Kifoula and her three children were detained on July 19, 2006.
She said that she was abused physically, verbally, and racially by the officers who picked them up. She was very distressed and started to take off her clothes. The officers covered the top half of her body with her bath mat. She was driven from Huddersfield to Leeds and then to Bedford with her children, who also became very distressed, as their mother was still naked except for the bath mat.
While in Huddersfield, in her home, she said they pushed her head into the sofa and hurt her arms, which are swollen. She said she couldn't even lift her child up or anything else. I have advised her to make a complaint and ask for a copy in writing. Other detainees confirmed that what she was saying was true.
Judith Mtili has asked if a doctor could see her husband because his blood pressure is very high at the moment.
July 24, 2006
Friday morning, July 21: It is 2 a.m. and I cannot get Prisca, her children and the other families behind the wire out of my mind. Sleep seems but a luxury in the midst of so much human suffering which is totally unnecessary. I am exhausted after spending days speaking to other mothers behind the wire. I am feeling really hopeless at the moment. This family's removal date is July 24, 2006. We have two days to try and do something.
We have lost one family. This is the Solomon family. Remember our little two and a half year old I.D. cardholder? Promise Solomon, and her sister Princess Solomon, their mother managed to resist for 50 days with non-compliance. They were served with a removal order after 6 p.m. and removed at 3 a.m. and taken to the airport the day the report on Britain's youngest prisoners was published.
The Home Office won't only bend its own rules a little. It seems to break every single one.
We only found out in the afternoon that they had gone, as sometimes we cannot get through or are not put through to the women behind the wire.
One of the mothers, who related the whole story to me, said Meggy just broke down and really sobbed. She also told me that there was an elderly lady from the Congo who was very distressed and she was crying and taking her clothes off in the hope that they will leave her alone. She was handcuffed naked and taken together with the Solomon family. This I am sure will be forever imprinted on Princess's and Promise's young minds.
Another family was due to be removed on the July 21, at 6 p.m. I spoke to Leatitia and Stacy's mother in the morning and she was really down. Her solicitor I believe was trying really hard as her friend in Glasgow told me. When I tracked them down at Queen's building [PDF] on a call box number, Queen's building, we think is in terminal 4 and it is a holding center before removals.
I believe the family was with immigration officials. The second, third, fourth and fifth time I tried they could not be found. A few people were good enough to offer to look for them, as they seemed to know who I was talking about. By this time it was almost 5 p.m. This is one of the most dynamic mothers who has resisted deportation for 68 days. I hope from the bottom of my heart that she has managed it again. But that is only simply to buy time or as a colleague put it, the Home Office sees it as simply missing the first bus, but right behind it, the other one will be on time.
On July 19 we got a call about a Congolese mother and children who had been detained. The father was not home, which means he was left behind. We hope that will delay the removal. We had been trying to track them down since the calls but only managed to late Friday afternoon. I spoke to Prisca on the phone for about 20 to 30 minutes. She had guards standing outside her door. When I asked her why they were guarding her she told me that she had threatened to kill herself.
I then proceeded to ask her if the Home Office had paid her and her family a pastoral visit, she did not know what I was talking about and I had to break it down for her. Prisca told me Home office officials came to visit them one month before they were snatched and all they asked for was one of the children's birth certificates. When she asked them why they wanted it, they said they just needed to check on something. The document was returned the next time they went to sign.
The next time she heard from the Home Office was the battering of her front door and the police shouting, "Open up! It's the police!" This is every asylum seeker's most dreaded moment that you live and relive. Any loud knock is enough to shatter one's nerves.
When Prisca opened the door, the Home Office bullies bulldozed their way in, with such force, eight or ten of them, two women who immediately went up to the children to try to keep them calm while the home bullies were laying in on Prisca. What can anyone expect a mother who is half-asleep to do? All I would be thinking of is protecting my children in any way I can.
She said as she was trying to resist them an Asian and a white man were insulting her, calling her all sorts of names. They even told her she came to sell herself in this country.
She said they physically, verbally and racially abused her. She was so distraught she took off her clothes begging them to spare her and her children's lives. Prisca was handcuffed naked and to insult her even further these Home Office thugs took her bath mat and used it to cover just her top half. She said her children were brought in; to sit next to their handcuffed naked mother.
The Home Office thugs drove them from Huddersfield to Leeds and then all the way to Yarl's Wood still naked with a just bath mat covering only her top half. This appears to be what Home Office must resort to meet their 5-year target: strip mothers, parents and their children of all pride and dignity. One wonders what else they will be resorting to towards the end of their unreasonable target if they are doing this in the first year.
Prisca said her children cried most of the way to Yarl's Wood. When she arrived she complained about the abuse she and her children had suffered. Her hands were swollen and still are. I have had confirmation of this from two other parents.
Prisca said, "I can not even pick up my youngest child to try to comfort him as my arms are too painful."
All she was given was paracetamol, the Yarl's Wood wonder drug that is a cure for every detainee's illness.
She said that the one man who was on duty when she arrived was very helpful and appeared to be kind but she has not seen him again since. She says she is so depressed and cannot stop crying. The children are so traumatized that even when she cries when they are sleep, they all wake up and start crying too.
She says, "I just can't take this it would be better if they kill me or I die."
I know I keep saying women or mothers, but believe you me there are some fathers too, one of these fathers has been in Yarl's Wood for 20 plus months, he has amazing strength and is so good natured. I tease him endlessly about being the veteran detainee. He has a great sense of humor. When I am feeling really down after taking down a few stories, our veteran detainee keeps a smile on my face. We even manage to have a laugh. He is my translator and right hand man. It's really touching how he runs around getting the new arrivals settled in and counseling them in his own way. When I am really worried about someone, my veteran brother says, "Don't worry, sister. I will go and talk to them and sort everything out."
Two pregnant mothers who gave birth in prison were arrested on arrival as they were traveling on false documents, both were trying to get to Canada before they were detained, despite claiming asylum they were still imprisoned, when they and their babies had served their prison sentence they then started serving their indefinite immigration sentences, one mother said she has only been for her first interview and is waiting for her appeal hearing. I can only relate these stories as they are given to me. I have a good relationship with most of these parents and I have no reason to disbelieve them.
July 27, 2006
The parents of 16 families incarcerated in Yarl's Wood IRC have refused their morning meal, they have also refused to send their children to either the school or the nursery.
I have just spoken to some of the parents refusing food and they are saying they can no longer take life behind the wire. Their main concern is their children. They want to know what crimes their children have committed to be incarcerated indefinitely.
These parents came together to discuss the issue of the detention of their children yesterday evening and decided within the hour that they should make their feelings public and that a hunger strike would be the best way to emphasize the plight of their children. Starting at breakfast time this morning they have refused to eat.
One parent said for those of us who have been granted judicial review, we are still being held as the Home Office has said they would like to make more enquires. This parent went on further to say that: "It is like they have put us in a small box, with the intention of forcing us to go back to our countries which are not safe."
"As I am on medication that I need to take with food I have stopped taking any medication. We are tired of being treated less than human beings. The ill treatment of our wives and children must stop. They deserve to be treated with human dignity."
One of the mothers said she saw three staff holding and questioning a little boy about why he was not going to school.
Another said: "We want the Home Office to hear us and free us, I don't understand how some people are freed without bail and some have to obtain bail."
After reading Anne Owers's report on Yarl's Wood, which was published yesterday, I am not surprised that the parents have taken action.
Yarl's Wood has seen many hunger strikes since it opened and I doubt this will be the last one.
July 28, 2006 [Listen to podcast]
The hunger strike by the parents of children detained at Yarl's Wood is still solid this morning.
One of the mothers I have just spoken to says that none of the parents took their children to breakfast this morning and will probably keep their children away from lunch and supper.
Children in detention are the forgotten children, often snatched before dawn and imprisoned indefinitely. Somewhere this side of the wire are friends and teachers all wondering what has happened to these children and their parents.
Since last Thursday, the following has happened:
Aboubacar Bailey Junior made bail yesterday after 100 days in detention
Brothers Adecokundo Taiwo and Adeole Taiwo are still in detention. The children's health, welfare and lack of appetite are an ongoing concern for mom, who suffers with joint pains and depression. She says all she was ever given was paracetomol. The children still want to know when they can go back home to their friends and school.
Aliyah, our youngest little detainee, is still doing time. She was born on June 15, 2006. She has also just spent a day in hospital because of constipation. Her mom said it is because of the poor diet. She is a breast-feeding mom and she says she is terrified to stop breast-feeding.
Her mother has concerns about hygiene issues at Yarl's Wood IRC.
When I asked mom about where the baby was born, she said she was rushed to hospital from prison and then taken back to prison four hours after Aliyah was born. She said she has no family or friends in the U.K. as she was detained while in transit to Canada to join her sister. She was imprisoned for carrying false documents. Despite seeking asylum and being refused she said she has only used up her one appeal, "but it appears they would like to keep me here indefinitely. No second appeal date has been set."
Leatitia, Stacy, Princess, and Promise have been deported. I don't know if all these children had received their anti-malarials before being put on the plane. If not their lives will be in danger, as they will have no natural immunity against malaria, Africa's biggest killer of children. Their removal makes me very, very angry.
I have spoken to all the parents and questioned them about pastoral visits, not one of them knew what I was talking about.
Pastoral visits are part of the Immigration and Nationality Directorate's family removals policy to prepare families for removal. Pastoral visits provide for the gathering of information regarding the circumstances of the family concerned and ensure that important issues such as medical or special needs are taken into account when deciding on arrest, detention, transportation and/or removal.
Africa seems to be the Home Office's flavor of the month for deportees at present.
One of the main medical needs of children, pregnant mothers, and adults being returned to any country in Africa, especially sub-Saharan Africa, is immunization against malaria. The Home Office, to the best of my knowledge, does not inform the families of the need for anti-malarials. In order for most families to get the anti-malarials, they have to take out or threaten to take out injunction orders against the Home Office.
Anne Owers published her report on Yarl's Wood on Wednesday of this week. I personally feel she has understated the facts. The people she talked about in her report and the people I have talked to over the last fortnight, could be interchanged. Nothing has improved that I can see and I personally feel things have got worse. There is definitely a lack of "duty of care" towards the children and parents currently incarcerated in Yarl's Wood IRC.
Aug 1, 2006
Six parents at Yarl's Wood IRC are still on hunger strike.
I have been speaking to them daily and have noticed their voices are getting weaker and they have told me that they feel very ill.
When I asked how long they intend to continue, they said until the Home Office comes and talks to them.
Baby Aliyah has just spent another day in hospital as she's had a high temperature since Friday. Her mom's fears for Aliyah's well-being have been doubled by the outbreak of chicken pox at the center. They have a bail hearing on Friday. Hope they get free.
Molly Sebbatta is four and a half years old and she's now spent 26 days in detention. She is suffering. Her mom, Agnes, says Molly's speech is deteriorating and she is bed-wetting, which never happened at home. She has also started wetting herself during the day. This family too has had two removal directions and are still being detained.
One family who have been detained since early July is made up of a father, a mother (both refusing food) and two daughters. They have had removal directions set twice. The dates have come and gone and they are still being detained. They applied for bail and were refused because the adjudicator said he could not release them since removal directions had been set.
As I will be visiting some of the parents for the next two days, I phoned the booking office at Yarl's Wood and was told that there was an outbreak of chicken pox and I could come at my own risk. When I enquired from a good number of parents about the outbreak, some had been told about it but others heard about it from me for the first time.
NHS Direct says chicken pox is a highly contagious virus, with an incubation period of 15 to 20 days. Chickenpox is most contagious the day before the rash appears and until the blisters are all dry and crusted over (usually about five days). If you have chickenpox you should avoid contact with pregnant women who have not had chickenpox, newborn babies and people with a low immune system -- for example, those with cancer or advanced H.I.V. -- as these people can't fight infection as well as those with a healthy immune system.
As a result of the outbreak Yarl's Wood will not receive any new detainees until August 21.
I have just spoken to Mia and she says the reason she and Aliyah have not been released is due to accommodation and the fact that she does not have an address to go to in the U.K. She has said besides her befriender, there is no one else she knows.
The other mothers who were in the same situation with her have since been released and put in hostels.
She is very concerned about Aliyah's well being. Aliyah spent a day in hospital last week and then yesterday she spent another day in hospital due to a cold. Mia is concerned about the outbreak of chicken pox and the effect it could have on her baby who is only five weeks old.
She has said her solicitor has applied, on her behalf, for accommodation from the National Asylum Support Service. She has tried endlessly to get in touch with her solicitor but has not been able to get through to her. She is not sure if the solicitor is away or not.
September 8, 2006
When children behind the wire start to call Yarl's Wood Immigration Removal Centre "home," it clearly shows that their perception of living in Yarl's Wood is that they have lived there a long time.
Six-year-old Molly Ssebatta spent six weeks in detention with her mother.
Three attempts to remove them failed. On getting back to Yarl's Wood the third time, Molly said to her mum: "We are home."
Molly's mother said the family was released after the resident social worker's intervention. In the Family Welfare Assessment Weekly Review, the social worker wrote that Molly continues to show, signs of increasing institutionalization.
Sisters Annarose, Joanne and their parents Judith and Juslain were released on Aug. 3, from Yarl's Wood IRC.
They went back to their home in Dudley where they had been snatched from only to find that they were no longer tenants and the house had been boarded up.
The Refugee Council found them emergency accommodation in Birmingham, which was one room.
When I first spoke to Judith after their release she said to me: "Can you hear how happy the children are?"
"Free at last," Judith said. "Even though the four of us are still living in one room since our release, it is better than that prison Yarl's Wood."
Annarose, the eldest is still suffering because of her experiences of detention. I regularly meet with the family, and we have to be careful about mentioning the Home Office and Yarl's Wood as she becomes very distressed.
Joanne is just a toddler, a mere two and half years old. What is most disturbing is that every time she sees a policeman, traffic warden or anyone in security uniform or if the word "search" is mentioned, she lifts up her arms to be body-searched as this was the norm at Yarl's Wood, where body-searches on the girl child and mothers are carried out by both male and female officers.
Another thing that Joan does regularly is, when she hears a phone ring she shouts out, "244." When she picks up the phone she says, "244," which was the family's room, pager and I.D. number to obtain meals, and receive phone calls and other services.
I have witnessed some of Joanne's behaviors and it's enough to make me weep.
How can such things happen in what is supposed to be a civilized society?
I have just been speaking to Judith and Juslain who have told me they are being dispersed again, this time to Cardiff.
For Annarose to start another school she needs her birth certificate. The family went to Annarose's old school on the hope of getting a copy.
Judith said when Annarose heard that they were going to Dudley, she was so excited as she thought she would be going back to her old school to be with her friends.
When mom told her that it was only to fetch her birth certificate, she said to her mother: "Please let me go back to my old school."
Can you imagine what it must be like to a nine-year-old who loved her school, teacher and friends to go back to a school she can never again attend?
This article was first published on OhmyNews International.
Nellie de Jongh logs her visits and related information on the Web site of the National Coalition of Anti-Deportation Campaigns (NCADC), and e-mails an account of what she is seeing and hearing to a growing number of people.
The following narrative is based on her e-mails:
July 20, 2006
Aboubacar Bailey Junior was born on April 16, 2006, in Holloway prison. He served his first 79 days there, and then he was transferred to continue his indefinite sentence at Yarl's Wood. To date, he has served 15 days.
His crime, according to immigration law, is the immigration status of his parents.
Baby Aboubacar suffers from a skin condition that keeps him and his mom awake at night. Doctors are not very helpful because Aboubacar is, first and foremost, an illegal immigrant -- even before he can ever be a child.
At Yarl's Wood, babies are not getting enough to eat. They are suffering from loss of appetite and can hardly eat the food they are provided.
Halama, Aboubacar's mother, said he received better care at Holloway prison. There, breast-feeding mothers got an extra liter of milk in a flask for their babies every night. At Yarl's Wood, they are told there is no extra milk for breast-feeding mothers. They are told to drink a lot of water instead.
Halama said she believes the only reason their babies were treated better in prison was because British nationals were also housed there.
"At Immigration Removal centers we are all foreign nationals, that is why they don't care about our babies," Halama said.
Ayodele Micheal Ode was born on April 17, 2006. He, too, was born in prison and lived there for the first 22 days of his life, before being transferred to Yarl's Wood, where he continues to serve his extended prison sentence. What terrible crime did this baby commit to have already served 93 days in two prisons?
Leatitia Kakmeni Pameni was born on Oct. 12, 2003, and Stacy Leuni Singoue, on Feb. 23, 2005. They were both detained on May 11, 2006. To date, the two siblings have served 68 days in detention. Tomorrow, they will be deported to the Central African Republic.
Princess Solomon was born on Oct. 19, 1997, and Promise Solomon, on Jan. 6, 2004. The two sisters and their mother were detained on May 30, 2006. They have served 50 days in detention to date. Promise's identity card has the following information on the back: "This card is to be carried at all times while you are in the centre and handed in when you leave. The card must be produced on request to Officers to obtain access to the centre facilities."
Promise is two and a half years old. How can she comply with the instructions?
Promise is suffering from ill health. She has had nosebleeds for the past few days. According to Meggy, Promise's mother, the doctor has not been helpful and was unable to reassure her about either of her children's poor health. No thorough examination was carried out.
Meggy has resorted to holding Promise in her arms, over her shoulder, while she sleeps, as she has woken up on several occasions to find the child, her clothing, and her bedding covered in blood. Her worst fear is that Promise will choke to death if she lays her down to sleep.
Aliyah Benoni was born on the June 15, 2006, and is the youngest child on my list. Like Ayodele she, too, was born in prison where she served the first 15 days of her life. She was then transferred to Yarl's Wood on July 5, 2006. She continues to serve her indefinite sentence and has done 15 days. At time of writing, she is only 30 days old.
Molly Ssebatta was born on Oct. 5, 2001. She was detained on July 5, 2006 -- at 5:30 a.m. Molly's speech has been affected since detention. She has no appetite and refuses to eat most days. She wants to go back home, and she misses her friends. She had been detained for 15 days.
Adecokundo Taiwo was born on June 20, 2002, and Adeole Taiwo, on Jan. 13, 2005. They have both spent 15 days behind the wire. According to their mother, before they were snatched in one of the Home Office's infamous dawn raids, the two brothers had been to their doctor and were due for a review, as their doctor had said they had an infection. The mother was very distressed by the attitude of the doctors at Yarl's Wood, who have even turned down her request for Paracetomol. Mostly, the brothers want to know when they will be able to go back home, and to school, to do normal things again.
I am amazed at the courage of some of these parents. Most are fighting back in their own way with noncompliance. They get together, have discussions and meetings, and write letters to the authorities. Working with these women/parents has brought home to me just how terrible immigrants are treated in this country. The fact that innocent babies are born in prison and then transferred to immigration detention centers leaves me very angry indeed.
July 22, 2006
Prisca Kifoula and her three children were detained on July 19, 2006.
She said that she was abused physically, verbally, and racially by the officers who picked them up. She was very distressed and started to take off her clothes. The officers covered the top half of her body with her bath mat. She was driven from Huddersfield to Leeds and then to Bedford with her children, who also became very distressed, as their mother was still naked except for the bath mat.
While in Huddersfield, in her home, she said they pushed her head into the sofa and hurt her arms, which are swollen. She said she couldn't even lift her child up or anything else. I have advised her to make a complaint and ask for a copy in writing. Other detainees confirmed that what she was saying was true.
Judith Mtili has asked if a doctor could see her husband because his blood pressure is very high at the moment.
July 24, 2006
Friday morning, July 21: It is 2 a.m. and I cannot get Prisca, her children and the other families behind the wire out of my mind. Sleep seems but a luxury in the midst of so much human suffering which is totally unnecessary. I am exhausted after spending days speaking to other mothers behind the wire. I am feeling really hopeless at the moment. This family's removal date is July 24, 2006. We have two days to try and do something.
We have lost one family. This is the Solomon family. Remember our little two and a half year old I.D. cardholder? Promise Solomon, and her sister Princess Solomon, their mother managed to resist for 50 days with non-compliance. They were served with a removal order after 6 p.m. and removed at 3 a.m. and taken to the airport the day the report on Britain's youngest prisoners was published.
The Home Office won't only bend its own rules a little. It seems to break every single one.
We only found out in the afternoon that they had gone, as sometimes we cannot get through or are not put through to the women behind the wire.
One of the mothers, who related the whole story to me, said Meggy just broke down and really sobbed. She also told me that there was an elderly lady from the Congo who was very distressed and she was crying and taking her clothes off in the hope that they will leave her alone. She was handcuffed naked and taken together with the Solomon family. This I am sure will be forever imprinted on Princess's and Promise's young minds.
Another family was due to be removed on the July 21, at 6 p.m. I spoke to Leatitia and Stacy's mother in the morning and she was really down. Her solicitor I believe was trying really hard as her friend in Glasgow told me. When I tracked them down at Queen's building [PDF] on a call box number, Queen's building, we think is in terminal 4 and it is a holding center before removals.
I believe the family was with immigration officials. The second, third, fourth and fifth time I tried they could not be found. A few people were good enough to offer to look for them, as they seemed to know who I was talking about. By this time it was almost 5 p.m. This is one of the most dynamic mothers who has resisted deportation for 68 days. I hope from the bottom of my heart that she has managed it again. But that is only simply to buy time or as a colleague put it, the Home Office sees it as simply missing the first bus, but right behind it, the other one will be on time.
On July 19 we got a call about a Congolese mother and children who had been detained. The father was not home, which means he was left behind. We hope that will delay the removal. We had been trying to track them down since the calls but only managed to late Friday afternoon. I spoke to Prisca on the phone for about 20 to 30 minutes. She had guards standing outside her door. When I asked her why they were guarding her she told me that she had threatened to kill herself.
I then proceeded to ask her if the Home Office had paid her and her family a pastoral visit, she did not know what I was talking about and I had to break it down for her. Prisca told me Home office officials came to visit them one month before they were snatched and all they asked for was one of the children's birth certificates. When she asked them why they wanted it, they said they just needed to check on something. The document was returned the next time they went to sign.
The next time she heard from the Home Office was the battering of her front door and the police shouting, "Open up! It's the police!" This is every asylum seeker's most dreaded moment that you live and relive. Any loud knock is enough to shatter one's nerves.
When Prisca opened the door, the Home Office bullies bulldozed their way in, with such force, eight or ten of them, two women who immediately went up to the children to try to keep them calm while the home bullies were laying in on Prisca. What can anyone expect a mother who is half-asleep to do? All I would be thinking of is protecting my children in any way I can.
She said as she was trying to resist them an Asian and a white man were insulting her, calling her all sorts of names. They even told her she came to sell herself in this country.
She said they physically, verbally and racially abused her. She was so distraught she took off her clothes begging them to spare her and her children's lives. Prisca was handcuffed naked and to insult her even further these Home Office thugs took her bath mat and used it to cover just her top half. She said her children were brought in; to sit next to their handcuffed naked mother.
The Home Office thugs drove them from Huddersfield to Leeds and then all the way to Yarl's Wood still naked with a just bath mat covering only her top half. This appears to be what Home Office must resort to meet their 5-year target: strip mothers, parents and their children of all pride and dignity. One wonders what else they will be resorting to towards the end of their unreasonable target if they are doing this in the first year.
Prisca said her children cried most of the way to Yarl's Wood. When she arrived she complained about the abuse she and her children had suffered. Her hands were swollen and still are. I have had confirmation of this from two other parents.
Prisca said, "I can not even pick up my youngest child to try to comfort him as my arms are too painful."
All she was given was paracetamol, the Yarl's Wood wonder drug that is a cure for every detainee's illness.
She said that the one man who was on duty when she arrived was very helpful and appeared to be kind but she has not seen him again since. She says she is so depressed and cannot stop crying. The children are so traumatized that even when she cries when they are sleep, they all wake up and start crying too.
She says, "I just can't take this it would be better if they kill me or I die."
I know I keep saying women or mothers, but believe you me there are some fathers too, one of these fathers has been in Yarl's Wood for 20 plus months, he has amazing strength and is so good natured. I tease him endlessly about being the veteran detainee. He has a great sense of humor. When I am feeling really down after taking down a few stories, our veteran detainee keeps a smile on my face. We even manage to have a laugh. He is my translator and right hand man. It's really touching how he runs around getting the new arrivals settled in and counseling them in his own way. When I am really worried about someone, my veteran brother says, "Don't worry, sister. I will go and talk to them and sort everything out."
Two pregnant mothers who gave birth in prison were arrested on arrival as they were traveling on false documents, both were trying to get to Canada before they were detained, despite claiming asylum they were still imprisoned, when they and their babies had served their prison sentence they then started serving their indefinite immigration sentences, one mother said she has only been for her first interview and is waiting for her appeal hearing. I can only relate these stories as they are given to me. I have a good relationship with most of these parents and I have no reason to disbelieve them.
July 27, 2006
The parents of 16 families incarcerated in Yarl's Wood IRC have refused their morning meal, they have also refused to send their children to either the school or the nursery.
I have just spoken to some of the parents refusing food and they are saying they can no longer take life behind the wire. Their main concern is their children. They want to know what crimes their children have committed to be incarcerated indefinitely.
These parents came together to discuss the issue of the detention of their children yesterday evening and decided within the hour that they should make their feelings public and that a hunger strike would be the best way to emphasize the plight of their children. Starting at breakfast time this morning they have refused to eat.
One parent said for those of us who have been granted judicial review, we are still being held as the Home Office has said they would like to make more enquires. This parent went on further to say that: "It is like they have put us in a small box, with the intention of forcing us to go back to our countries which are not safe."
"As I am on medication that I need to take with food I have stopped taking any medication. We are tired of being treated less than human beings. The ill treatment of our wives and children must stop. They deserve to be treated with human dignity."
One of the mothers said she saw three staff holding and questioning a little boy about why he was not going to school.
Another said: "We want the Home Office to hear us and free us, I don't understand how some people are freed without bail and some have to obtain bail."
After reading Anne Owers's report on Yarl's Wood, which was published yesterday, I am not surprised that the parents have taken action.
Yarl's Wood has seen many hunger strikes since it opened and I doubt this will be the last one.
July 28, 2006 [Listen to podcast]
The hunger strike by the parents of children detained at Yarl's Wood is still solid this morning.
One of the mothers I have just spoken to says that none of the parents took their children to breakfast this morning and will probably keep their children away from lunch and supper.
Children in detention are the forgotten children, often snatched before dawn and imprisoned indefinitely. Somewhere this side of the wire are friends and teachers all wondering what has happened to these children and their parents.
Since last Thursday, the following has happened:
Aboubacar Bailey Junior made bail yesterday after 100 days in detention
Brothers Adecokundo Taiwo and Adeole Taiwo are still in detention. The children's health, welfare and lack of appetite are an ongoing concern for mom, who suffers with joint pains and depression. She says all she was ever given was paracetomol. The children still want to know when they can go back home to their friends and school.
Aliyah, our youngest little detainee, is still doing time. She was born on June 15, 2006. She has also just spent a day in hospital because of constipation. Her mom said it is because of the poor diet. She is a breast-feeding mom and she says she is terrified to stop breast-feeding.
Her mother has concerns about hygiene issues at Yarl's Wood IRC.
When I asked mom about where the baby was born, she said she was rushed to hospital from prison and then taken back to prison four hours after Aliyah was born. She said she has no family or friends in the U.K. as she was detained while in transit to Canada to join her sister. She was imprisoned for carrying false documents. Despite seeking asylum and being refused she said she has only used up her one appeal, "but it appears they would like to keep me here indefinitely. No second appeal date has been set."
Leatitia, Stacy, Princess, and Promise have been deported. I don't know if all these children had received their anti-malarials before being put on the plane. If not their lives will be in danger, as they will have no natural immunity against malaria, Africa's biggest killer of children. Their removal makes me very, very angry.
I have spoken to all the parents and questioned them about pastoral visits, not one of them knew what I was talking about.
Pastoral visits are part of the Immigration and Nationality Directorate's family removals policy to prepare families for removal. Pastoral visits provide for the gathering of information regarding the circumstances of the family concerned and ensure that important issues such as medical or special needs are taken into account when deciding on arrest, detention, transportation and/or removal.
Africa seems to be the Home Office's flavor of the month for deportees at present.
One of the main medical needs of children, pregnant mothers, and adults being returned to any country in Africa, especially sub-Saharan Africa, is immunization against malaria. The Home Office, to the best of my knowledge, does not inform the families of the need for anti-malarials. In order for most families to get the anti-malarials, they have to take out or threaten to take out injunction orders against the Home Office.
Anne Owers published her report on Yarl's Wood on Wednesday of this week. I personally feel she has understated the facts. The people she talked about in her report and the people I have talked to over the last fortnight, could be interchanged. Nothing has improved that I can see and I personally feel things have got worse. There is definitely a lack of "duty of care" towards the children and parents currently incarcerated in Yarl's Wood IRC.
Aug 1, 2006
Six parents at Yarl's Wood IRC are still on hunger strike.
I have been speaking to them daily and have noticed their voices are getting weaker and they have told me that they feel very ill.
When I asked how long they intend to continue, they said until the Home Office comes and talks to them.
Baby Aliyah has just spent another day in hospital as she's had a high temperature since Friday. Her mom's fears for Aliyah's well-being have been doubled by the outbreak of chicken pox at the center. They have a bail hearing on Friday. Hope they get free.
Molly Sebbatta is four and a half years old and she's now spent 26 days in detention. She is suffering. Her mom, Agnes, says Molly's speech is deteriorating and she is bed-wetting, which never happened at home. She has also started wetting herself during the day. This family too has had two removal directions and are still being detained.
One family who have been detained since early July is made up of a father, a mother (both refusing food) and two daughters. They have had removal directions set twice. The dates have come and gone and they are still being detained. They applied for bail and were refused because the adjudicator said he could not release them since removal directions had been set.
As I will be visiting some of the parents for the next two days, I phoned the booking office at Yarl's Wood and was told that there was an outbreak of chicken pox and I could come at my own risk. When I enquired from a good number of parents about the outbreak, some had been told about it but others heard about it from me for the first time.
NHS Direct says chicken pox is a highly contagious virus, with an incubation period of 15 to 20 days. Chickenpox is most contagious the day before the rash appears and until the blisters are all dry and crusted over (usually about five days). If you have chickenpox you should avoid contact with pregnant women who have not had chickenpox, newborn babies and people with a low immune system -- for example, those with cancer or advanced H.I.V. -- as these people can't fight infection as well as those with a healthy immune system.
As a result of the outbreak Yarl's Wood will not receive any new detainees until August 21.
I have just spoken to Mia and she says the reason she and Aliyah have not been released is due to accommodation and the fact that she does not have an address to go to in the U.K. She has said besides her befriender, there is no one else she knows.
The other mothers who were in the same situation with her have since been released and put in hostels.
She is very concerned about Aliyah's well being. Aliyah spent a day in hospital last week and then yesterday she spent another day in hospital due to a cold. Mia is concerned about the outbreak of chicken pox and the effect it could have on her baby who is only five weeks old.
She has said her solicitor has applied, on her behalf, for accommodation from the National Asylum Support Service. She has tried endlessly to get in touch with her solicitor but has not been able to get through to her. She is not sure if the solicitor is away or not.
September 8, 2006
When children behind the wire start to call Yarl's Wood Immigration Removal Centre "home," it clearly shows that their perception of living in Yarl's Wood is that they have lived there a long time.
Six-year-old Molly Ssebatta spent six weeks in detention with her mother.
Three attempts to remove them failed. On getting back to Yarl's Wood the third time, Molly said to her mum: "We are home."
Molly's mother said the family was released after the resident social worker's intervention. In the Family Welfare Assessment Weekly Review, the social worker wrote that Molly continues to show, signs of increasing institutionalization.
Sisters Annarose, Joanne and their parents Judith and Juslain were released on Aug. 3, from Yarl's Wood IRC.
They went back to their home in Dudley where they had been snatched from only to find that they were no longer tenants and the house had been boarded up.
The Refugee Council found them emergency accommodation in Birmingham, which was one room.
When I first spoke to Judith after their release she said to me: "Can you hear how happy the children are?"
"Free at last," Judith said. "Even though the four of us are still living in one room since our release, it is better than that prison Yarl's Wood."
Annarose, the eldest is still suffering because of her experiences of detention. I regularly meet with the family, and we have to be careful about mentioning the Home Office and Yarl's Wood as she becomes very distressed.
Joanne is just a toddler, a mere two and half years old. What is most disturbing is that every time she sees a policeman, traffic warden or anyone in security uniform or if the word "search" is mentioned, she lifts up her arms to be body-searched as this was the norm at Yarl's Wood, where body-searches on the girl child and mothers are carried out by both male and female officers.
Another thing that Joan does regularly is, when she hears a phone ring she shouts out, "244." When she picks up the phone she says, "244," which was the family's room, pager and I.D. number to obtain meals, and receive phone calls and other services.
I have witnessed some of Joanne's behaviors and it's enough to make me weep.
How can such things happen in what is supposed to be a civilized society?
I have just been speaking to Judith and Juslain who have told me they are being dispersed again, this time to Cardiff.
For Annarose to start another school she needs her birth certificate. The family went to Annarose's old school on the hope of getting a copy.
Judith said when Annarose heard that they were going to Dudley, she was so excited as she thought she would be going back to her old school to be with her friends.
When mom told her that it was only to fetch her birth certificate, she said to her mother: "Please let me go back to my old school."
Can you imagine what it must be like to a nine-year-old who loved her school, teacher and friends to go back to a school she can never again attend?
This article was first published on OhmyNews International.
Friday, 3 November 2006
Refugees, Uncertainty and the Absence of Control
Claire Smith is an occupational therapy lecturer at the University of Teesside in the North East of England. She also works with health care providers and assists them to develop skills in meeting the mental health needs of refugees.
For the past two years, she has also been working as a psychological therapist at the Personal Medical Services General Practice, "Arrival," which provides primary health care to people seeking asylum and refugees who live in the North Tees Primary Care Trust area.
She has spoken at national and international conferences on "lifespan issues" for refugees as well as on the importance of social capital and the need to increase opportunities for refugees.
In an e-mail interview with Ambrose Musiyiwa, which took place between Sept. 19 and Nov. 2, Claire Smith talked about the work she has been doing and about the challenges faced by health care providers in meeting the mental health needs of refugees.
***
Musiyiwa: You work with health care providers, asylum seekers, as well as refugees. How did it all begin?
Smith: I trained as an occupational therapist, qualifying in 1991 and have worked in a number of adult mental health day services across the County Durham area. In that capacity I have worked in group and individual therapies with a wide range of clients with diverse needs, and over time began to find a special interest in working with people who had experienced traumatic life events, including sexual abuse, domestic violence, and support after [witnessing] murder and manslaughter.
I undertook a Masters in Counseling at the University of Durham, which I completed in 1999, and I joined the occupational therapy teaching team at the University of Teesside. I have been teaching on a range of issues, particularly practice skills around communication and mental health. I have spoken at conferences on issues around trauma and social exclusion.
Which conferences were these and what did you speak on?
I spoke at the fourth World Congress of the World Federation for Mental Health in Oslo on "lifespan issues" for refugees (specifically the sense that the experience of asylum interrupts adulthood and stops people engaging with all the really important tasks of adulthood, like work and family life).
I have also spoken at occupational therapy conferences and for MIND and Diverse Minds, encouraging staff to increase opportunities for refugees and on the importance of social capital.
You have been doing a lot of work with health care providers. How did that start?
About three and a half years ago, I saw an advert for a post for a development worker to develop skills in meeting the mental health needs of refugees. The post was funded by Health Action Zone monies, and coordinated by an organization called Alliance Psychological Services, who have the contracts to provide psychological therapies locally in primary care. I was successful at interview and took the post in addition to part time teaching at the University, delivering workshops for staff from a wide range of backgrounds — school nurses, midwives, therapists, reception staff, etc.
The workshops were designed to provide general information about asylum issues — focusing on myth busting and [on creating] a realistic impression of the challenges faced by refugees in the local area.
What are some of the myths about asylum seekers and refugees? Where do the myths come from and how prevalent are they?
The myths are mostly generated by ignorance and misinformation — and they often hinge around refugee entitlement, genuineness of claims, perceived threat, etc.
Locally there was a lot of grumbling about benefits and services, assuming that refugees got all sorts of extras, when in fact they receive far less than people thought. Much of this is created by negative media stereotypes, but also by the fact that this is an area of low ethnic density and local people were unfamiliar with people from different cultural backgrounds.
I think the prevalence of this myth-based thinking is quite high, and runs through large sections of the population. Even some people who wish to be sympathetic are anxious about some of the issues, and for others, refugees have become scapegoats.
Most people are able to change their minds if they are better informed, but others will hold fast to their beliefs because they serve some other purpose for them.
What was the reception to the workshops you were running like?
I was greatly encouraged by the fact that many people were genuinely keen and willing to help — but aware that they felt deskilled and were concerned that their abilities were unsuitable for meeting the needs of the clients. The key things seemed to be the fear of making a mistake with cultural needs, (as ours is an area of very limited ethnic diversity) and feeling overwhelmed by the wealth of need.
The main aim of the workshops was to allow staff to feel enabled, and to encourage them to use their transferable skills.
You have also been actively involved in the Personal Medical Services (P.M.S.) General Practice. What is the P.M.S. General Practice?
The P.M.S. practices were set up as a pilot project to permit more flexibility at primary care level, and stands for Personal Medical Services (as opposed to General Medical Services).
They were to offer new, tailored and creative approaches in areas of deprivation or complex needs — to be more flexible and to instigate change, and have often been used to provide specific care to particular groups.
There are a number of P.M.S. practices specifically for refugees, heroin users and other groups who may have complex needs.
How did your involvement with P.M.S. start and what do you do there?
The therapy post at our local P.M.S. General Practice, "Arrival," became available and I was approached to take it. The Arrival practice, opened in Stockton-on- Tees in April 2003 and it provides primary health care to people seeking asylum and refugees living in the North Tees Primary Care Trust area. It currently has about 650 patients, around half of whom are from Africa and half from the Middle East.
I have been there for two and a bit years, working one day a week as a psychological therapist (obviously, using both my occupational therapy and my counseling background). I am based within the practice, taking referrals from other team members, and providing individual therapies.
As an occupational and psychological therapist, what would you say are your main concerns?
I am keen to promote the potential for therapy with refugees and people seeking asylum and have spoken at national and international conferences on a number of facets of refugee work.
I started with the "feel the fear" stuff, encouraging people to get involved and use their skills, then I have been looking at social capital theory and refugees and now at adulthood and lifespan issues. I want colleagues from a range of disciplines to see potential and be keen to help, and to look at tapping into the resourcefulness of their clients rather than feeling overwhelmed. Some of the biggest challenges my clients face are around how to "live" in the short term, with such a difficult past, an impoverished and isolated present, and a future that is so totally unknown.
The primary challenges [they face] seem to be practical — managing day to day in an unfamiliar environment with little money and very limited support. Beyond that though I think there are huge difficulties associated with living long term with an uncertain future, adjustment and acculturation, managing loss (personal, social, cultural), building a necessary social network, finding occupational opportunities, and engaging with the natural tasks associated with their stage in the lifespan.
The people I see struggle endlessly to put the past behind them. Tormented by intrusive and often horrific memories and enormous loss, they struggle with the impoverished and isolated life in the here-and-now and they are moving towards the total unknown. This is particularly destructive — most of us kid ourselves that we know what the future holds, and have some control over it, but refugees can have no such illusions. For them they can't be sure whether to invest in life in this country or hold back for fear of losing anything they establish here.
Are these challenges peculiar to refugees and asylum seekers or are they also found in the general population where you are working?
Most of the challenges are found, in part, with any population (particularly from my experience of working in mental health) — but the uncertainty and the absence of control is something that is certainly greater for refugees (to my mind).
In previous work I may have been looking at exactly the same kind of issues — and people may have a host of barriers to better mental health — but here I have a huge barrier that is immovable by me, and over which the client has no control — the asylum decision. This is unusual and specific and leaves [the] client, and me, in a passive position (exactly where I don't want us to be, therapeutically).
Under current U.K. legislation, asylum seekers can only seek permission to work if their claim remains outstanding for longer than 12 months without a decision being made on it and providing the reason for the delay cannot be attributable to the asylum seeker. Those whose applications for asylum have failed are not allowed to work. What effect does this have on mental health, and why is it important for asylum seekers to be allowed to work?
I think this is one of the most destructive aspects of current policy. There is evidence from past experience in Sweden that suggests that engaging with the labor market is of great value and has better outcomes than psychological therapies in maintaining good mental health. People face the crushing experience of waiting day to day for [a] decision to be made about their future, without any real sense of productivity, and anything gainful to occupy their time. Most feel that they are wasting their critical early adult years, and feel a sense of disgrace at having to accept money from N.A.S.S. [the National Asylum Support Service] when they are well and able to work for their own money.
This article has also been featured on OhmyNews International and the World Press Review.
Wednesday, 9 August 2006
An Interview with Human Rghts Lawyer Steve Symonds
The Refugee Legal Centre (RLC) was formed in 1992 and is an independent not-for-profit organization. It is Britain's largest charity provider of legal representation and advice to asylum seekers.
The RLC provides legal advice and representation for those seeking protection under international and national human rights and asylum law. It delivers training and other support to those giving advice and representation in such cases and seeks to promote the interests of refugees and asylum seekers individually and collectively through law and public policy.
Recently, the RLC has been representing Zimbabwean asylum seekers in their bid to convince the Home Office to spare them from President Robert Mugabe's increasingly repressive and brutal regime.
In an email-interview in July, Steve Symonds, a legal officer with the RLC spoke to Ambrose Musiyiwa about the organization, the role he plays in it and the challenges asylum seekers and refugees face in the United Kingdom.
What is the Refugee Legal Centre? Who does the center work with and what does the work involve?
The RLC is the U.K.'s largest charity provider of legal representation and advice to asylum-seekers. The representation and advice we provide is essentially, at present, restricted to assisting asylum-seekers to understand and pursue, where there is merit, their claim for asylum under the Refugee Convention or Article 3 of the European Convention (as incorporated into U.K. law by the Human Rights Act 1998).
Occasionally, we will assist with some wider human rights and immigration matters relating to an asylum-seeker's application to be granted status in the U.K. and the immediate consequences that may follow on from a grant of status -- for example, seeking to be reunited with family; or obtaining travel documentation.
What is your role in the organization and how did you first get involved with it?
I am a Legal Officer. Essentially, this means I am one of a small team to lawyers, who provide advice and legal support to those who provide legal advice and representation to our large client group.
I also undertake my own casework, which is generally restricted to the more advanced stages of the appeal process in the U.K.'s immigration tribunal [which is] called the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal. I joined the organisation in 1999.
In fact, I have been providing free representation before a number of tribunals through a number of charities, sometimes as a paid worker and sometimes as a volunteer -- including those dealing with employment, social security and asylum law -- since 1994, shortly after I completed my legal vocational training as a barrister.
I have through this time developed a strong personal commitment towards the provision of legal advice and representation to individuals before courts and tribunals where basic rights and needs are in issue, and where often the individual is culturally, linguistically, educationally and economically at serious disadvantage in seeking to present and protect those rights and needs.
What would you say are the greatest challenges you, as an individual and as an organization, are facing in the work that you are doing? And, how are you dealing with those challenges?
There are substantial pressures due to a mix of under-resourcing, very short time limits, often changing and sometimes not especially coherent policy changes and a general distrust of asylum-seekers among many decision-makers, policy makers and the public at large.
In the main, the RLC continues to focus on its advice and representation work. However, it has made substantial changes to its working practices in an effort to cut costs (there being a general pressure from the Legal Services Commission, across the legal sector, upon those providing legal services under legal aid).
Seeking to provide informed, expert and effective advice and representation in these circumstances has become increasingly difficult for the RLC, as many legal service providers, of late.
Do you have any contact with asylum seekers who are in detention? What are the conditions under which they are being held?
We represent several detained clients. Conditions in detention vary, though much work on this has been done by Her Majesty's Inspectors of Prisons in recent years. More information is available from the Bail for Immigration Detainees.
The UNHCR has accused British politicians and some sections of the media of scapegoating asylum seekers and refugees. What are your comments on this? What needs to be done to change this?
There is a great deal of confusion in much public debate (whether in the media or in political debate) around asylum-seekers and refugees.
If this issue is to be managed effectively and fairly, there are broadly two changes, which I would look for.
Firstly, politicians (and broadcasters and writers) need to understand and reflect an understanding of these issues in leading this debate -- rather than habitually blurring issues of immigration, refugee protection, human rights law, security etc. That also would require both media and ministers to refrain from knee-jerk reactions to particular judgments, which fail to understand or at times attempt to understand the terms or effect of the judgment.
This article was first published on OhmyNews International.
The RLC provides legal advice and representation for those seeking protection under international and national human rights and asylum law. It delivers training and other support to those giving advice and representation in such cases and seeks to promote the interests of refugees and asylum seekers individually and collectively through law and public policy.
Recently, the RLC has been representing Zimbabwean asylum seekers in their bid to convince the Home Office to spare them from President Robert Mugabe's increasingly repressive and brutal regime.
In an email-interview in July, Steve Symonds, a legal officer with the RLC spoke to Ambrose Musiyiwa about the organization, the role he plays in it and the challenges asylum seekers and refugees face in the United Kingdom.
What is the Refugee Legal Centre? Who does the center work with and what does the work involve?
The RLC is the U.K.'s largest charity provider of legal representation and advice to asylum-seekers. The representation and advice we provide is essentially, at present, restricted to assisting asylum-seekers to understand and pursue, where there is merit, their claim for asylum under the Refugee Convention or Article 3 of the European Convention (as incorporated into U.K. law by the Human Rights Act 1998).
Occasionally, we will assist with some wider human rights and immigration matters relating to an asylum-seeker's application to be granted status in the U.K. and the immediate consequences that may follow on from a grant of status -- for example, seeking to be reunited with family; or obtaining travel documentation.
What is your role in the organization and how did you first get involved with it?
I am a Legal Officer. Essentially, this means I am one of a small team to lawyers, who provide advice and legal support to those who provide legal advice and representation to our large client group.
I also undertake my own casework, which is generally restricted to the more advanced stages of the appeal process in the U.K.'s immigration tribunal [which is] called the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal. I joined the organisation in 1999.
In fact, I have been providing free representation before a number of tribunals through a number of charities, sometimes as a paid worker and sometimes as a volunteer -- including those dealing with employment, social security and asylum law -- since 1994, shortly after I completed my legal vocational training as a barrister.
I have through this time developed a strong personal commitment towards the provision of legal advice and representation to individuals before courts and tribunals where basic rights and needs are in issue, and where often the individual is culturally, linguistically, educationally and economically at serious disadvantage in seeking to present and protect those rights and needs.
What would you say are the greatest challenges you, as an individual and as an organization, are facing in the work that you are doing? And, how are you dealing with those challenges?
There are substantial pressures due to a mix of under-resourcing, very short time limits, often changing and sometimes not especially coherent policy changes and a general distrust of asylum-seekers among many decision-makers, policy makers and the public at large.
In the main, the RLC continues to focus on its advice and representation work. However, it has made substantial changes to its working practices in an effort to cut costs (there being a general pressure from the Legal Services Commission, across the legal sector, upon those providing legal services under legal aid).
Seeking to provide informed, expert and effective advice and representation in these circumstances has become increasingly difficult for the RLC, as many legal service providers, of late.
Do you have any contact with asylum seekers who are in detention? What are the conditions under which they are being held?
We represent several detained clients. Conditions in detention vary, though much work on this has been done by Her Majesty's Inspectors of Prisons in recent years. More information is available from the Bail for Immigration Detainees.
The UNHCR has accused British politicians and some sections of the media of scapegoating asylum seekers and refugees. What are your comments on this? What needs to be done to change this?
There is a great deal of confusion in much public debate (whether in the media or in political debate) around asylum-seekers and refugees.
If this issue is to be managed effectively and fairly, there are broadly two changes, which I would look for.
Firstly, politicians (and broadcasters and writers) need to understand and reflect an understanding of these issues in leading this debate -- rather than habitually blurring issues of immigration, refugee protection, human rights law, security etc. That also would require both media and ministers to refrain from knee-jerk reactions to particular judgments, which fail to understand or at times attempt to understand the terms or effect of the judgment.
This article was first published on OhmyNews International.
Sunday, 18 June 2006
Britain and I.O.M. Criticized for Putting Refugees at Risk
The British government and the International Organization for Migration (I.O.M.) have been criticized for returning people to war zones, dictatorships and areas of famine.
Under the Voluntary Assisted Return and Reintegration Program (V.A.R.R.P.) run by the I.O.M. and funded by the British government's Home Office and the European Refugee Fund, asylum seekers are being offered financial incentives to get them to return to their countries of origin.
Between January and April this year, a total of 1,956 asylum seekers took up the £3,000 that is being offered and returned to countries which include Afghanistan, Congo, Iraq, Lebanon, Rwanda, Somalia, Sudan and Zimbabwe.
Immigration minister, Liam Byrne said, "A significant amount of work continues to promote voluntary returns, and there is a high level of interest to take up the scheme."
The Home Office publicized the scheme by writing to all the 54,000 asylum seekers whose applications for refuge are still being processed and who are currently receiving benefits and accommodation from the National Asylum Support Service.
The scheme was also advertised in government-funded centers that have contact with refugees and asylum seekers as well as in all immigration detention, reporting and removal centers.
Former immigration minister, Tony McNulty said the £3,000 that is being offered asylum seekers to make them leave Britain voluntarily was "good value for money" when compared with the £11,000 cost per person of a forced deportation.
No Borders Glasgow, a support group for refugees and immigrants, reported that Kath Sainsbury of the National Coalition of Anti-Deportation Campaigns (N.C.A.D.C.) described the voluntary assisted return and re-integration program as a cynical bribe.
"Instead of using the stick of enforced destitution and poverty to discourage asylum seekers, the Home Office have started using carrots — a scheme offering cash to asylum seekers to give up their claims, but no guarantees on either their safety or whether they'll get the money if they do return," Sainsbury said.
She added that giving people incentives does not make them safe.
"We know that in some countries, failed asylum seekers are put in prison on return and can only secure their release if they pay a bribe. We could now be exposing them to the possibility of further extortion if there is a perception that they have money," Sainsbury said.
At a conference organized by the I.O.M. that was held in London in May, I.O.M. chief of mission, Jan Wilder revealed that he was aware of a Zimbabwean returnee who was questioned "for a while" by that country's dreaded secret police, the Central Intelligence Organization.
"It was a woman from Bulawayo in March 2004. We brought this incident to the attention of the government. The government was satisfactorily responsive," Wilder said.
Wilder, however, would not discuss security issues despite repeated questions about the safety of returnees.
Established in 1951, the I.O.M. describes itself as "a pro-active, responsive and results oriented intergovernmental organization dedicated to promoting humane and orderly migration worldwide by serving the policy and program needs of governments and migrants."
No BordersGlasgow observed that in recent years, the I.O.M. has moved from managing the movement of economic migrants to assisting states to control forced migrants.
"Unlike the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR), the I.O.M. has no humanitarian remit and its move into controlling the movement of people seeking asylum has raised alarm among human rights, refugee and aid agencies," the N.C.A.D.C. said.
In May 2003, Amnesty International criticized the role of the I.O.M. as an "alternative agency for states" where states prefer to avoid their human rights obligations.
"Given that I.O.M. does not have a protection mandate for its work with refugees and displaced people, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch recommend that I.O.M. should refrain from taking a role in situations which fall squarely under the protection mandate of other international organizations, such as the UNHCR," Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch said in a joint statement.
Ed Schenkenberg van Mierop, coordinator of the International Council of Voluntary Agencies (I.C.V.A.), pointed out that in 1996, the I.O.M. was asked to truck a group of 6,000 Zairian Tutsis from North Kivu, where extremist Hutus were creating a Hutu-land and carrying out a policy of ethnic cleansing among Tutsis. The I.O.M. brought the Tutsis across the boarder to Rwanda thereby aiding the extremist Hutus achieve their aims.
Two years earlier, in Rwanda, between April and July 1994, extremist Hutus slaughtered an estimated 800,000 to 1,000,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus who opposed the ethnic cleansing.
Van Mierop said, "much more must be done in order to increase I.O.M.'s accountability especially when it sees itself as providing 'assisted and orderly migration services.'"
This article was first published in the World Press Review.
Saturday, 3 June 2006
Trade Unions and Religious Leaders Call for Illegal Immigrants Amnesty
Trade unionists and religious leaders are calling on the government to consider an amnesty for illegal immigrants living and working in the United Kingdom.
It is estimated that there are between 310,000 and 570,000 illegal immigrants currently living and working in the U.K. If the British government does not allow them to settle and if the immigrants do not leave the country of their own accord, it could take over a decade for the government to trace and deport them.
"Assuming we can find them, and assuming that people aren't going away of their own accord, it would take some time," former immigration minister, Tony McNulty told the BBC (May 18, 2006). He went on to calculate that it would take at least 10 years, at a rate of 25,000 per year.
A leading trade union official called for debate around granting amnesty to the half a million immigrants living and working in the U.K.
Jack Dromey, deputy secretary general of the Transport and General Workers Union said the Government should acknowledge the contribution the immigrants are making and adopt a sensible approach towards them.
He told the BBC (May 20, 2006): "The economy needs migrant labour. They are the backbone of the service economy, cleaning, catering, looking after the old, the sick and the dying, and of food and agriculture.
"Yes, it is true that there are probably half a million here without documents. The question is what do we do about that?"
He said the government should stop criminalising illegal immigrants.
"They live in fear of the knock at the door and they are exploited by too many employers.
"What we need, therefore, is a sensible approach which does not criminalise those good men and women."
Dromey said it was neither practical nor sensible to seek to deport all the illegal immigrants.
"You can't deport half a million workers -- who would clean, who would cook, who would pick in our fields?
"The time has come for a debate around an amnesty for those workers," he said.
Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor also called for the government to consider an amnesty for illegal immigrants.
The Cardinal said that although the Catholic Church does not encourage or approve of illegal immigration, it could not ignore the plight of people without legal status.
"While our nation benefits economically from the presence of undocumented workers, too often we turn a blind eye when they are exploited by employers," he said.
"Is it not time to consider, as other countries have done, ways of regularising their situation? those who are working in the country and do not have a criminal record - to the benefit of our economy and to enable them to play a fuller part in society?"
A leading think-tank said the move would raise over ￡1bn in tax revenues annually which could them be spent on public services.
In its study, "Irregular migration in the U.K," the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) said £1.04 billion in potential fiscal revenue could be raised if the Britain regularised illegal immigrants and allowed them to settle, work and pay their taxes.
The IPRR said trying to remove the almost half a million people living in the country illegally is could cost as much as £4.7 billion annually and was "simply not feasible, nor is it desirable."
"Nobody likes illegal immigration and the subject is a deeply difficult one for politicians. But the bare truth is that we're not going to deport hundreds of thousands of people? our economy would shrink and we would notice it straight away in uncleaned offices, dirty streets and unstaffed pubs," said IPPR director Nick Pearce.
"So we have a choice: make people live in the shadows, exploited and fearful for the future, or bring them into the mainstream, to pay taxes and live an honest life."
In 2002, a House of Lords report called for an amnesty for the "growing underclass of people" who cannot be removed, whether failed asylum seekers or "illegal" migrants.
The report entitled "A Common Policy On Illegal Immigration," emphasised that some form of regularisation is unavoidable if a growing underclass of people in an irregular situation, who are vulnerable to exploitation, is not to be created.
It said more could and should be done across the EU to increase the opportunities for legal immigration in order to meet identified labour shortages.
It urged government to manage migration in a way that controls illegal immigration effectively while bearing in mind that they are dealing with people, most of whom are motivated simply by a desire for a better life for themselves and their families.
It also emphasised that in devising measures to control illegal immigration the Britian must ensure that it scrupulously observes its human rights obligations.
The report said it was disappointing that the government, while enthusiastically endorsing measures designed to improve the enforcement of immigration controls, had consistently chosen not to opt into positive immigration measures, such as those relating to admission for employment and self-employment; family reunion; and protection for the victims of trafficking.
This article was first published on OhmyNews International.
It is estimated that there are between 310,000 and 570,000 illegal immigrants currently living and working in the U.K. If the British government does not allow them to settle and if the immigrants do not leave the country of their own accord, it could take over a decade for the government to trace and deport them.
"Assuming we can find them, and assuming that people aren't going away of their own accord, it would take some time," former immigration minister, Tony McNulty told the BBC (May 18, 2006). He went on to calculate that it would take at least 10 years, at a rate of 25,000 per year.
A leading trade union official called for debate around granting amnesty to the half a million immigrants living and working in the U.K.
Jack Dromey, deputy secretary general of the Transport and General Workers Union said the Government should acknowledge the contribution the immigrants are making and adopt a sensible approach towards them.
He told the BBC (May 20, 2006): "The economy needs migrant labour. They are the backbone of the service economy, cleaning, catering, looking after the old, the sick and the dying, and of food and agriculture.
"Yes, it is true that there are probably half a million here without documents. The question is what do we do about that?"
He said the government should stop criminalising illegal immigrants.
"They live in fear of the knock at the door and they are exploited by too many employers.
"What we need, therefore, is a sensible approach which does not criminalise those good men and women."
Dromey said it was neither practical nor sensible to seek to deport all the illegal immigrants.
"You can't deport half a million workers -- who would clean, who would cook, who would pick in our fields?
"The time has come for a debate around an amnesty for those workers," he said.
Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor also called for the government to consider an amnesty for illegal immigrants.
The Cardinal said that although the Catholic Church does not encourage or approve of illegal immigration, it could not ignore the plight of people without legal status.
"While our nation benefits economically from the presence of undocumented workers, too often we turn a blind eye when they are exploited by employers," he said.
"Is it not time to consider, as other countries have done, ways of regularising their situation? those who are working in the country and do not have a criminal record - to the benefit of our economy and to enable them to play a fuller part in society?"
A leading think-tank said the move would raise over ￡1bn in tax revenues annually which could them be spent on public services.
In its study, "Irregular migration in the U.K," the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) said £1.04 billion in potential fiscal revenue could be raised if the Britain regularised illegal immigrants and allowed them to settle, work and pay their taxes.
The IPRR said trying to remove the almost half a million people living in the country illegally is could cost as much as £4.7 billion annually and was "simply not feasible, nor is it desirable."
"Nobody likes illegal immigration and the subject is a deeply difficult one for politicians. But the bare truth is that we're not going to deport hundreds of thousands of people? our economy would shrink and we would notice it straight away in uncleaned offices, dirty streets and unstaffed pubs," said IPPR director Nick Pearce.
"So we have a choice: make people live in the shadows, exploited and fearful for the future, or bring them into the mainstream, to pay taxes and live an honest life."
In 2002, a House of Lords report called for an amnesty for the "growing underclass of people" who cannot be removed, whether failed asylum seekers or "illegal" migrants.
The report entitled "A Common Policy On Illegal Immigration," emphasised that some form of regularisation is unavoidable if a growing underclass of people in an irregular situation, who are vulnerable to exploitation, is not to be created.
It said more could and should be done across the EU to increase the opportunities for legal immigration in order to meet identified labour shortages.
It urged government to manage migration in a way that controls illegal immigration effectively while bearing in mind that they are dealing with people, most of whom are motivated simply by a desire for a better life for themselves and their families.
It also emphasised that in devising measures to control illegal immigration the Britian must ensure that it scrupulously observes its human rights obligations.
The report said it was disappointing that the government, while enthusiastically endorsing measures designed to improve the enforcement of immigration controls, had consistently chosen not to opt into positive immigration measures, such as those relating to admission for employment and self-employment; family reunion; and protection for the victims of trafficking.
This article was first published on OhmyNews International.
Friday, 16 September 2005
British Government Asked to Reconsider Its Position on Zimbabwean Asylum Seekers
Asylum seekers, British lawmakers, Zimbabwean human rights activists and opposition party leaders, British and international non-governmental organizations, as well as British and international religious leaders have called upon the British government to reconsider its policy of deporting failed Zimbabwean asylum seekers.
The failed asylum seekers feel the Home Office is throwing them right back into the lion’s den from which they thought they had fled when they came to Britain. They dread falling back into the hands of President Robert Mugabe’s secret police and its Gestapo interrogation and torture tactics. For those who will survive these with their lives and sanity still intact, there is the added despair of state-imposed homelessness to deal with.
Over the past four months alone, the Zimbabwe government has killed three children; made between 200,000 and 1.5 million people homeless when it razed their homes to the ground; destroyed over 100,000 businesses and has arbitrarily arrested over 30,000 innocent people.
These recent attacks have been targeted at Zimbabwe’s urban population and are a calculated punishment for that population’s continued support of the opposition political party, the Movement for Democratic Change (M.D.C.).Reports coming from Zimbabwe suggest that this is only the beginning. Worse abuses are on the way.
Despite being aware of the on-going, brutal, state-sponsored oppression and violence and the accompanying beatings, torture, political killings, forced evictions and arbitrary arrests that the Zimbabwean population is being subjected to, the British Home Office says it is safe to send people back to Zimbabwe.
In the first three months of 2005, 95 Zimbabweans were forcibly removed from Britain and there are plans to return a further 116 to Zimbabwe.
Immigration minister, Tony McNulty says: “Since returns were resumed to Zimbabwe last November, we have received no substantiated reports of abuse of any person returned to the country.”
However, officials in the Zimbabwe government have publicly said Britain is training spies, mercenaries and agents to destabilize the country and is sending them into Zimbabwe under the guise of returning failed asylum seekers.
On arrival the deportees are invariably met by Mugabe’s secret police, detained, tortured and interrogated. Some of the deportees have not been heard from since. Their families, both in Zimbabwe and in Britain, report that the last they heard of them was that they had been picked up by the secret police.
Archbishop Pius Ncube, winner of the 2005 Burns Humanitarian Award (Scotland’s equivalent of the Nobel Peace Prize), and a long-standing critic of Mugabe, says it is not safe to return asylum seekers to Zimbabwe.
He says: “People who were asylum seekers in Britain and are returned have been detained by the police in Zimbabwe, some being tortured and forced to confess that they were in anti-government activities.”
The M.D.C. leader, Morgan Tsvangirai and other opposition party lawmakers and non-governmental and human rights organizations operating in Zimbabwe, have said it is not safe to return failed asylum seekers.
The U.S. Department of State spokesman, Adam Ereli has talked of the “tragedy, crime, horror” and obscenity of what the Zimbabwean government is perpetrating against its own people while the head of the European Union, Jose Manuel Barroso says the situation is causing very “grave concern.”
Baroness Williams of Crosby, leader of the Liberal Democrats in the Lords, has gone further and accused the British government of acting illegally in breach of the U.N. Convention on Refugees.
She says: “It is clearly not safe for people with any record of political party activity to go back to Zimbabwe.”
Labor M.P., Kate Hoey, who secretly visited Zimbabwe recently, emphasizes that anyone who has a slightest involvement with any kind of opposition politics is in real danger.
“There should be an immediate stop on all removals until we have got to the bottom of some of the cases in a lot more detail but also until we see a changed situation in Zimbabwe,” Hoey says.
The foreign secretary, Jack Straw, is aware of the brutality of the Zimbabwe government.
Speaking in June, the foreign secretary said: “Over the past three weeks, the Mugabe regime has launched a brutal crackdown on some of the most vulnerable Zimbabweans”.
“There are also reports of children being detained in prison and separated from their parents.”
In July, a senior British judge called on the government of Prime Minister Tony Blair to halt all deportations of failed asylum seekers to Zimbabwe pending a further High Court hearing.
The comments came as scores of Zimbabwean asylum seekers went on a hunger strike to protest against being forced to return to their troubled country.
Judge Andrew Collins said he acted after a representative from the Refugee Legal Council told him there was evidence to suggest that asylum seekers were in danger of being ill-treated and abused under President Robert Mugabe’s regime, simply because they had claimed asylum in Britain.
He said it could be “arguable” on the basis of this material that it was unsafe to send back failed asylum seekers to the country.
Collins said there were between 70 and 80 applications before the High Court at the moment involving Zimbabweans fighting removal on the grounds that they fear for their lives or that they would suffer inhuman and degrading treatment.
Justice Collins “stayed” the cases while the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (A.I.T.) looks at new evidence of the current situation in Zimbabwe. The A.I.T. will hear one test case to set out definitive guidance.
In response to the decision of Justice Collins in the High Court, Tim Finch, director of communications at the Refugee Council said:
“As a result of [the] hearing no more asylum seekers will be returned to Zimbabwe until at least October and that will be a huge relief to the men and women who faced being flown back to the country … Many of them are opponents of Mugabe and they would have been in real danger if they’d been sent home …
“The comments of the judge show that ministers are under intense pressure to back down and stop all returns to Zimbabwe until the situation there improves radically. This is clearly the right thing to do and the government should act now. There is no need for any more expensive and time-consuming court hearings when everyone can see that returning people to Zimbabwe is so unsafe.”
Barry Stoyle, chief executive of the Refugee Legal Centre, said:
“We are very concerned at the dangers faced by asylum seekers who are returned to Zimbabwe. We are pleased that the Court has agreed there is an arguable case that they face persecution. We look forward to being able to argue the matter in full before the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal.
“We are concerned that some Zimbabwean asylum seekers are still detained. It is now only proper for the Home Office to release all detained Zimbabwean detainees pending the outcome of the test cases.”
This article was first published on the World Press Review
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)