Despite assurances, Scottish charity Y-people has started the eviction of up to 100 refugees ahead of the transfer of housing contract to Serco.

Update, 14 May

At least four refugees have been evicted in the last week, their locks changed while they were out. Please use the new template letter, or write your own, to appeal to YPeople Chief Executive Joe Connolly to stop these lock-outs, and stick to the promises he made to Glasgow City councillors and campaigners last month.

Muhammad Abdel Munion, of Sudan is now homeless, after returning to his home of 2 years on Tuesday to find his locks changed. Muhammad had not received any proper notification that he was going to be made homeless from his landlord, Scottish charity Y-People.

In March of this year, Y-people, formerly YMCA, announced it was ending it’s ‘no-evictions’ policy, which had allowed refugees refused asylum, who would otherwise be homeless and destitute, to stay in Y-people flats. Support groups in the city have been pressing Ypeople to allow the residents more time.

On the 25th April at a City Chambers meeting, Y-People Chief Executive, Joe Connolly, assured councillors, refugees and campaigners that there would be no evicitions until August, that “no locks would be changed” and legal due-process would be adhered to.

Campaigners found out about Muhammad’s case when he sought refuge at the Glasgow Destitution Network Night Shelter. Muhammad arrived with nothing but the clothes he was wearing as he had still not received any of his belongings and it was only after campaigners put pressure on senior management did staff agree to return his belongings to him 2 days later.

Muhammad’s story comes 2 weeks after Joe Connolly, Chief Executive of Y-People publicly stated that no locks would be changed without proper legal action being taken to remove people from the properties before they are handed back to property owners.

During the public meeting Joe Connelly “agreed to send a letter out to people explaining the processes and giving dates of when things will be taking place”. No letters have been received by Muhammad, nor have any of the individuals we’ve been in touch with reported receiving such a letter.

Once again Y-People have failed to deal with vulnerable asylum seekers and their supporters in a fair and honest manner. Joe Connolly stated that “they are looking at the most humane way of asking people to move on”. By using dirty tricks and giving unclear messages they have created fear amongst the asylum seeking community. Some individuals, terrified by the threat of eviction, have gone into hiding.

Muhammad is among around 100 asylum seekers who have had their initial asylum claim refused but are unable or unwilling to return to their homes. Many of these people, are victim to administrative errors and poor decision making on the part of UKBA, yet are now facing imminent homelessness.

We’re calling on those concerned about this situation to write to Y-People, expressing your concerns at their dishonest practice and ask them to adhere to due process. Attached is a template letter which can be sent to:

j.connolly@ypeople.org.uk

Joe Connolly
Chief Executive, YPeople
William Harte House
15 Dava Street
GLASGOW G51 2JA

**The Night Shelter has been providing much needed support to those left completely destitute since November 2011: they rely on public support to continue. If you can support the Night Shelter financially, please do so by donating money to the “Glasgow Destitute Asylum Seeker Night Drop In” account at any Lloyds TSB branch, account No: 75140563 and sort Code: 87-37-51.**

We, along with other organisations, are compiling case studies of these refusals. We are seeking anecdotal evidence (or statistical evidence if you have it) of good quality further representations being rejected by UKBA, particularly if the decision is made within a matter of days of submission.

You may be a local community group or work with/ support asylum seekers and migrants and be able to give a general picture of what is happening in your area. We’d love to hear from you. 

If you would like to know more, or have evidence you would like to share, please contact lisa@ncadc.org.uk

————–

Below is another sneak preview of our campaigning toolkit, which will be available soon in full, online and in printed hardcopy !

Fresh Claims

Difference between further representations and fresh claims

• further representations (or further submissions) can be submitted to the UK Border Agency (UKBA) at any point after an asylum claim or human rights application is refused, but a fresh claim is only when appeal rights are exhausted.
• further representations might be emphasising a point already made, but to be considered as a fresh claim, must include new information
• a helpful way to think about a fresh claim is that it will either need to provide evidence of a new fact, or provide a new source of evidence for a fact that has previously been rejected
• your or your lawyer submit the further representations; UKBA decides if it’s a fresh claim

The legal test

From the immigration rules:

353. When a human rights or asylum claim has been refused or withdrawn or treated as withdrawn under paragraph 333C of these Rules and any appeal relating to that claim is no longer pending, the decision maker will consider any further submissions and, if rejected, will then determine whether they amount to a fresh claim. The submissions will amount to a fresh claim if they are significantly different from the material that has previously been considered. The submissions will only be significantly different if the content:

(i) had not already been considered; and

(ii) taken together with the previously considered material, created a realistic prospect of success, notwithstanding its rejection.

The key points are: significantly different from the material that has previously been considered. If it’s material that hasn’t been considered before, why hasn’t it been considered? If you’ve had access to the evidence all along and haven’t submitted it without a good reason, UKBA will use that a reason to reject it.

And a realistic prospect of success: You may have new evidence, but is it relevant to your situation? Is it material (central) to your case? There may have been a big political change in your home country, but if your claim is based on sexuality for example, and the political change can’t be seen to impact on that, it won’t be considered a fresh claim. Other things UKBA will consider in this is whether the evidence can be trusted. Previous ‘negative credibility findings’ may count against you here, and objective evidence becomes even more important.

Credibility has other implications. If for example you have new evidence about the persecution of Elai subclan in Somalia, this will not be considered to have a realistic prospect of success, no matter how good the evidence, if it is not believed that you a member of that sub-clan. You would need to also provide evidence showing that UKBA and the courts were wrong to doubt your clan identity. A more common example is political persecution in countries such as Iran and Zimbabwe. Political oppression in these countries is well known and is accepted to occur by UKBA, and you may find many news reports and human rights reports confirming this is occurring and so submit this as a fresh claim. But unless you can show that you are from these countries, a political activist, and high profile (at least at the level of the activists mentioned in the reports), it is likely that UKBA will reject the fresh claim.

Many fresh claims are rejected on this basis. They may include good evidence from reputable sources about human rights abuses and persecution, and UKBA/the courts may not dispute that this evidence is true. The problem is that UKBA do not believe these problems and event are relevant to you.

It’s not just arguing your case in a better way – there has to be material that is new to back up your arguments.

What might be included in a fresh claim?

NB This is not advice about what to put in your further representations, and is not an exhaustive list.  It is an explanatory list of some examples of how situations can change, leading to there being new evidence.

• Evidence supporting your original asylum claim that you have only just received.  For example, documents proving political activity that have only just arrived from your country of origin. NB – always keep the envelopes these arrived in and any proof of delivery/receipt

• Personal news from back home.  Have you recently received information that the authorities/whoever was persecuting you is still looking for you? People may have come round to your house, or maybe a family member or friend has recently been targeted. It may be possible to get a witness statement from people back home to support this claim.

• Change of circumstances back home.  For example, political developments. These developments must be relevant to your case. How would a change of government, a new law or policy introduced put you at risk if you were returned there? A change of circumstances might be reflected in new country guidance case law. Case law can be slow to catch up with political developments, however, so you may be submitting further representations before this has been heard and therefore be relying on other evidence.

• Case law/legal developments.  This may be a change in country guidance case law (for example, the historic case of RN and Zimbabwe).  This could also be a reported judgement (in someone else’s case) that UKBA was wrongly applying a policy, or that the procedure for determining asylum should be done in a certain way. If you can show that your case was refused because UKBA was using a certain policy, or certain procedures were used that have now been found to be unlawful, your fresh claim may ask for you case to be reconsidered on that basis.

•  Human rights (article 8 ) arguments.  Article 8 grounds (family or private life in the UK) are meant to be included when you first apply for asylum. It may be that there have been changes in your life since then (new relationship/child etc), or that you have new evidence to prove the existence of this family and private life. Letters of support from friends, family, community, church/mosque/temple, school/college might be considered as evidence to submit. Documentary evidence such as birth or marriage certificates might fall into this category. You might be able to get a professional or an expert to comment on the impact to you/your family if you were removed from the UK – this is best done through a legal advisor.

Where can you find objective evidence?

Objective evidence in this section refers to sources that aren’t connected to you. Generally, good places to find this evidence are through human rights organisations or reputable media sources.

NCADC has a world blog where we collect reports that may be useful if you are researching a fresh claim. We also post reports and news stories through our Facebook page and our Twitter account.

Good places to look for information on human rights in a country of origin are:

Amnesty International
Human Rights Watch
International Crisis Group
IRIN News
UNHCR RefWorld
Irish Refugee Documentation Centre
U.S. State Department Human Rights Reports
Voice of America news
The Guardian newspaper
The New York Times
BBC news
Asylum Research Consultancy (especially commentaries on OGN)
European Country of Origin Information Network 

These are all considered as reputable sources of information, and the media sources listed are ones that have good world news sections and are interested in human rights.  If you are getting evidence from other sources, think about who has written the report or article.  If it’s a group that is in opposition to a government, for example, UKBA and the courts might not consider it to be objective/good evidence.

How do you submit a fresh claim?

This normally has to be done in person in Liverpool, although occasionally exceptions are made.  If you are in detention, you should be able to fax it to UKBA, or a solicitor does this for you.

• Most further representations are not accepted as being fresh claims. This means that they are not looked at substantively, instead UKBA say that what has been submitted does not meet the legal test (see above).
• There is no right of appeal when a fresh claim is certified (not accepted to meet the test). Your legal options may be a judicial review of this decision, or a new/different fresh claim.
• If a fresh claim is accepted as being a fresh claim, this does not mean UKBA accepts your story. It just means you are back in the system. Your claim will then be assessed on its merits (this changes what financial support you are entitled to, and your appeal rights are the same as the first claim).

Fresh claims and removals

The Immigration Rules say:

353A. Consideration of further submissions shall be subject to the procedures set out in these Rules. An applicant who has made further submissions shall not be removed before the Secretary of State has considered the submissions under paragraph 353 or otherwise.

BUT submitting further representations does not mean you are safe. UKBA frequently issue the letter saying your further representations are not considered to be a fresh claim at the same time as issuing removal directions. They may also attempt removal if you cannot prove you have submitted a fresh claim – so make sure someone has evidence you have submitted it, and evidence of receipt by UKBA.

Saturday 21 April
11am

Stop the Evictions

End Destitution

Housing is a Human Right

At a meeting on Tuesday night, attended by numerous organisations, it was agreed unanimously to continue the campaign against the eviction and enforced homelessness of refused refugees by calling the above rally and protest at the UKBA offices in Brand St, Govan.

Supported by:

FBU Scotland
Glasgow City Unison
Glasgow Campaign to Welcome Refugees
National Coalition of Anti-Deportation Campaigns
Unity Centre
Defend Glasgow Services
Stop the War
Right to Work Campaign
Coalition of Resistance
Black Activists Rising Against the Cuts

The statement below was agreed at the rally at the Red Road on Thursday 12 April.

Up to 140 Glasgow asylum seekers are to be evicted by their landlord, Ypeople, in the next few weeks, and left without home, and without access to work or any benefits or state support whatsoever.

These people have had their claim for asylum refused even though most are unable to return to their countries because they are too dangerous. They include Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Somalia, Zimbabwe and others.

Ypeople, a charity funded to provide accommodation to vulnerable people, claims they have to do this before handing over the housing of asylum seekers to Serco, a giant multinational making money for its shareholders out of running prisons and detention centres. The hand over period runs to November yet Ypeople have decided to evict everyone right now. Community groups say they will not be able to cope.

We call on Ypeople to act with humanity towards these extremely vulnerable people and on Glasgow City Council and the Scottish Government to step in and stop this disaster before it happens. What kind of city and what kind of Scotland are they governing that allows this kind of humanitarian outrage to occur?

Finally we call on the British government to honour its international obligations in the spirit as well as the letter by granting protection and the right to work for all people seeking sanctuary.

Come and support the demonstration on Saturday. Bring friends, family, workmates, trade union branches, churches and other organisations, banners, placards etc.

If you wish to add your organisations name to the list of supporters of this demonstration, please reply to this email.

Please circulate this message round your networks.

Tuesday 17th April at 7pm

At the STUC, 333 Woodlands Rd, G3 6NG
Map here

with speakers from:

• Glasgow Campaign to Welcomes Refugees
• National Coalition of Anti Deportation Campaigns
• Unity Centre

and many others

Background to the campaign here

Resistance grows - Article by Grace Franklin, Glasgow Local News

Glasgow protest 12 April. (Duncan Brown)

See photos of demonstration on Thursday 12th April outside Ypeople building at Red Road flats

Afghan policemen and officials stand next to the wreckage of a car used in a suicide attack (AFP, Massoud Hossaini)

Insurgents managed to infiltrate the supposedly secure diplomatic areas of the city (where foreign embassies and NATO are based), and were even in the vicinity of the Presidential palace.

There is no security in Kabul or the rest of Afghanistan, with over half a million people displaced by the war subsisting in camps: and yet the UK Border Agency is planning a mass deportation charter flight. The flight was due to take off from London at 00:10 hours on Tuesday 17 April. It has been cancelled…for now.

This latest attack demonstrates that nowhere – and no-one – is safe in Kabul.    Private security staff, who escort individuals being forcibly removed from the UK, would seem to share this concern. A Guardian investigation has uncovered reports that eleven Reliance security guards have been suspended after refusing to fly on charter flights to Afghanistan, citing a lack of security provisions.

The United Nations Refugee Agency has stated that it is unable to provide for returning refugees, saying it’s programme in Afghanistan has been “the biggest mistake UNHCR ever made”.    A recent Amnesty International report highlights how an escalation in fighting has left half a million Afghans internally displaced, struggling to survive in makeshift shelters, with around 400 more joining their ranks every single day. Kabul alone houses up to 35,000 displaced persons in 30 slum areas around the city.

And still the UK Border Agency claims that Afghanistan is safe. It claims it’s safe for young Afghans who made treacherous journeys to seek sanctuary in the UK. It claims it’s safe even though their asylum applications have not received proper scrutiny. It claims it’s safe for age- disputed children – some of these boys underwent age assessments (a key process in determining which legal process is applied and the level of support provided) that were not compliant with the law.

NCADC  is supporting campaigns fighting for justice for two of these young men (Popal and Nasib); but around 50 will be removed against their will if and when charter flight PVT800 is re-scheduled.

No information about the companies running these flights – which depart every few weeks – or the airport from which the flight will depart, is ever released. Many other refused Afghan asylum seekers will be booked on to the flight as ‘reserves’, only to be told at the last minute that they will receive a temporary reprieve.

The Home Affairs Select committee described this practice as ‘inhumane’.  NCADC agrees. But what is also inhumane is the mass deportation of young men in need of protection to a war zone. It is shameful and unjust, and is a policy that the UK government is trying to hide through the use of hidden private flights.

We call on the government to cease these enforced removals immediately.

See photos of demonstration on Thursday 12th April outside Ypeople building at Red Road flats

Stop the evictions
No deportations
End destitution now

Rally and protest

Red Road / Petershill Rd

Thursday 12 April 5.00 – 7.00pm

Called by:

Glasgow Campaign to Welcome Refugees,
National Coalition of Anti-Deportation Campaigns,
The Unity Centre,
Ypeople Glasgow Residents Association

Up to 140 Glasgow asylum seekers are to be evicted by their landlord, Ypeople, in the next few weeks, and left without home, and without access to work or any benefits or state support whatsoever.

These people have had their claim for asylum refused even though most are unable to return to their countries because they are too dangerous. They include Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Somalia, Zimbabwe and others.

Ypeople, a charity funded to provide accommodation to vulnerable people, claims they have to do this before handing over the housing of asylum seekers to Serco, a giant multinational making money for its shareholders out of running prisons and detention centres.

The hand over period runs to November yet Ypeople have decided to evict everyone right now. Community groups say they will not be able to cope.

We call on Ypeople to act with humanity towards these extremely vulnerable people and on Glasgow City Council and the Scottish Government to step in and stop this disaster before it happens.

What kind of city and what kind of Scotland are they governing that allows this kind of humanitarian outrage to occur?

Finally we call on the British government to honour its international obligations in the spirit as well as the letter by granting protection and the right to work for all people seeking sanctuary.

Come and support the demonstration next Thursday. Bring friends, family, workmates, trade union branches, churches and other organisations, banners, placards etc.

If you wish to add your organisations name to the list of supporters of this demonstration, please email ncadc@ncadc.org.uk

Please circulate this message round your networks.

The first section to be previewed is on Immigration Detention:

What is immigration detention?

People detained under immigration powers may be detained in an Immigration Removal Centre (IRC), or foreign national prisoners who have completed their custodial sentence may continue to be detained in prison.

Some of the immigration removal centres are run by private security companies, others by the Prison Service. People in detention cannot leave and have very limited freedom of movement within the centres. Security levels are similar to prisons.   The ‘detention estate’ has expanded massively over the last few years.

NCADC website has information on detention centres, visitors groups, and links to UKBA detention centre webpages here.

Who can be detained? 

There are points in the asylum and immigration process when someone is more likely to be detained, but the simple answer is that almost anyone subject to immigration control can potentially be detained.  This means that anyone without British citizenship could be detained under immigration powers, and there have even been cases of British citizens detained in error by UKBA, but it is very unusual for this to happen.

When can you be detained?

The times you are most at risk of being detained are:

• when you enter the UK
• when you apply for asylum or another kind of leave having already entered the UK, usually after a screening interview (detained fast-track and non-suspensive appeals)
• after an application for leave (including asylum) is refused and you have no further appeals available to you (you may have received a letter from UKBA saying you are ‘appeals rights exhausted’).

For more information on entry to the UK, and detained fast-track and non-suspensive appeals, look out for future sections on the asylum and immigration processes.

It is common for someone at risk of detention to be picked up when they go for their regular reporting/signing in, but people are also picked up from their homes (sometimes in dawn raids), from the community, even at their children’s’ schools.

Being prepared in case of detention 

• Community sign-in at reporting

Most people who have applied for asylum or other forms of leave to remain and have not yet got papers must report to sign at their local UKBA reporting centre or a police station. At every reporting visit, the person is at risk of detention.

Some people always phone a friend when they are entering the reporting centre, with instructions for what to do and who to contact if they are detained. If the friend does not get a call within an hour or two to say they are safe they will call the solicitor and anyone else, like a campaign support group or NCADC.

In some areas, local support groups (such as the Unity Centre in Glasgow and WAST in Manchester) have set up systems to help with this. They will check-in with the group first, who keep a record of everyone’s contact details and emergency instructions of what to do if they do not come out.

This means that people who are signing at UKBA will know that people are looking out for them. This can save valuable time: supporters can then start finding out exactly where that individual is, what has happened, and what can be done to help straight away.

• If you are a campaigning or support group: find out about the local detention system.  Do you know where people are often picked up, and where they will be taken?  This will save valuable time when you are supporting someone who has been detained.
• If you are at risk of being detained, do you have a list of emergency contacts that you have shared with someone?  These might include your solicitor’s number (and your reference number), any close friends or family, people you have spoken to about caring for any children in case of detention, doctors or hospitals if you have a medical condition.
• If you are a campaign or support group, have you got a system in place for raising support as quickly as possible (with the consent of the person who has been detained)? This might take the form of a telephone tree, or a plan for an emergency meeting.

• Copy of documents

If someone is detained, it may become impossible for them to access their documents. This means that vital evidence that a solicitor or a campaign group needs can’t be reached.  It’s a good idea to have copies of all your important documents (and not just with a solicitor, as these will not always be accessible and can be lost if the solicitor firm closes down, for example).Give a copy of these documents to someone you trust. This may be a friend, or a supporter.

• If possible, give a friend a copy of your house/flat/room key

This may not be possible, for example if you are living in asylum support or Section 4 accommodation.  But some ex-detainees suggest giving a friend/supporter a copy of your house key so if you are detained, they can go and get essential things for you from your house.  Only give a key to someone you trust, and make sure you are allowed to do this under your accommodation rules

• have a non-smart phone/save your numbers to the sim card

It used to be the case that any mobile phones with internet access or a camera would be taken off you at the point of detention.  It would therefore be a good idea to have a very basic phone that you could keep with you.  However, there are now schemes in place (for example, at Yarl’s Wood IRC) where everyone’s phone is taken off them and they are issued with a Yarl’s Wood phone.  If it’s possible to still use your own sim card, it’s a good idea to have saved important numbers to the sim card beforehand (rather than to your phone handset) so the numbers will be still available in the replacement phone.

Practical Information in Detention

The procedure in each IRC is different.  You may not be able to rely on the staff there to give you helpful information about procedure and your rights, so it could be a good idea to contact a local visitor group (see below).

If you feel your rights are not being respected, let someone know. You may want to tell a visitor group, your solicitor, a friend or supporter, or make a complaint to the IRC or UKBA.

To find out more about your rights in detention, you could contact one of the groups in the Resources section below.

Support in Detention

Friends and family can visit you in detention.  They will need to find out the visiting times, notify the centre in advance (they may need to give a few hours or notice or, in the case of some centres like Yarl’s Wood, give 24 hours’ notice) and bring ID with them.  They can ask the centre what form of ID they will need.  They will need to have their photograph taken at the centre, and their fingerprints may be scanned as well.  See the Home Office website for details of visiting each detention centre.

There are also befriending and visitor groups set up for most immigration removal centres and some short-term holding facilities and prisons.  The Association of Visitors to Immigration Detainees (AVID) has a list of their members on its website.

AVID has also published a useful handbook for people wanting to visit someone in immigration detainees.

It can be difficult to keep in touch with people in detention.  At some centres, such as Morton Hall, mobile phone signal is very poor.  Most IRCs will have landlines that detainees can use.  For the centres where IRC mobile phone and sim cards are being given in replacement for a detainee’s own phone, the cost of calling out can be very expensive.  If you are supporting someone in detention, remember that many phone networks charge to pick up voicemail messages.  If you don’t get through to the person in detention, it’s better to send a text message which they can read for free.  Internet access can also be limited in detention – certain sites such as Facebook are blocked.

Emotional support  is very important for people who are detained, as it is a very isolating and distressing experience.  See upcoming section on Emotional Support.

If you are in detention, you may want to think about a public campaign calling for your release.  This may involve Community Action,  Media campaigning, Internet campaigning, or Political campaigning.  Think about whether you want a public campaign, or a smaller private campaign. Look out for upcoming sections on Community Action, Media campaigning, Internet campaigning and Political Campaigning.

There will also be legal routes available to you, which are explained below.

Legal Options

 Legal aid contracts

Funded legal advice given free to immigration detainees can now only be done by certain contracted firms.  Although it is not completely up-to-date, a useful list of these firms can be found at the Legal Services Commission (LSC) website here.

These firms have legal surgeries which you can sign up for if you are in detention.  The rotas for these surgeries get booked up very far in advance, and the quality of legal advice is variable.  Access to legal aid is limited by restrictive criteria set by the authorities. If you experience problems signing up with the rota, or with the legal advice you receive, you can make a complaint to the solicitor firm and to the Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner.  You could also contact the LSC, who are responsible for the contracts.  The LSC, working with Bail Immigration for Detainees (BID), AVID, and Detention Action and the Immigration Legal Practitioners Association (ILPA) are attempting to monitor the provision of legal advice in detention.

Alternatives to legal aid solicitors

If you are unable to get legal advice from one of the contracted firms in immigration detention, you could think about these alternatives:

• pro-bono legal advice.  Some legal advisors can provide legal advice on a voluntary basis. They will not be charging the LSC for this work, so they do not need to work for one of the LSC contracted firms.   Cuts to legal aid and the closure of firms means legal advisors are increasingly overstretched, so while the need for pro-bono advice is going to increase, the capacity of legal advisors to provide it may decrease.
• support that does not involve giving legal advice.  A supporter may be able to help explain your legal documents (for example, explaining what certain words mean), or help you look for evidence, without giving legal advice.  This could be done over the telephone, but is better done in person.
• fundraise for a private solicitor (look out for upcoming Understanding your legal case section)

Getting Out of Detention

There is no set time limit on immigration detention.  International law, European law, British law and UKBA policy all enshrine the presumption of release and liberty but this is often not reflected in practice.

Case law on length of detention has established that people can only be detained for a ‘reasonable’ period of time, and the power to detain only exists when there is a ‘realistic prospect of removal’.

UKBA must undertake regular detention reviews to justify a continued detention.   To request release from detention, a request can be made for temporary admission or bail.

Bail is more formal – temporary admission is easier to request, but is not granted very often.  It’s best to have the help of a solicitor in applying for bail, as the application involves a bail hearing (unless an application is made for CIO bail – unlikely to be granted if an application for temporary admission has been refused).  If you cannot find a solicitor you can apply yourself.  BID (see below) have a handbook which can help with this.  BID have also written a report highlighting the problems in obtaining bail, called  A Nice Judge on a Good Day.

The main conditions of release will be a specified address and sureties.  Sometimes people are released but then fitted with an electronic tagging device.

If UKBA has been found to have not followed its policy on reasonable length of detention, this will make at least some of the period of the detention unlawful. The detainee may subsequently be able to seek financial compensation (damages).

Addresses

Successful temporary admission and bail applications will include a particular address to live at on release.  This is often difficult for migrants to provide.  If you are applying for bail, you can apply for Section 4 accommodation as a bail address (although at the time of writing, there are long delays with processing these applications).  BID have produced a leaflet with more information about post-detention accommodation.

Another obstacle can be the location of the address:  if someone is acting as a surety (see below), and does not live near the accommodation address, bail may be refused on the basis the surety cannot easily check you are living at the address you have said you will.

Sureties 

A surety is someone who puts up a sum of money guaranteeing the person applying for bail will keep to the bail conditions.  If the detainee doesn’t keep to the conditions, the surety will lose the money they have put up.  No money is handed over when someone agrees to be a surety, but if bail conditions are broken the money will be taken from their bank account.  The amount for surety is a significant amount – is it often in the thousands of pounds (and if the surety has a high income, it will be even higher as it is meant to be an amount which would be difficult to lose.  If the surety is an asylum seeker or someone on a very low income, it may be a much lower figure than this).

The bail application form has space for two sureties, though this isn’t a requirement.  The surety will need to attend the bail hearing and provide ID, proof of address, occupation, financial status and immigration status.  NB – a criminal record check and immigration record check will be undertaken of all people who act as sureties.  You do not need to be a British citizen to act as surety, but if you have problems with your immigration status, it may not be a good idea to act as a surety for someone.

The best sureties are close friends or colleagues, rather than family members or supporters who do not know the detainee well, but this is not always possible.   If you do not know anyone to act as a surety, you could speak to your local visiting group or BID.

Bail Hearings

It’s important to check the bail summary provided by UKBA (their case for continued detention) – there are often mistakes in this that could be challenged.The bail hearing will consider things such as the release accommodation, sureties, an individual’s likelihood to

abscond (run away or not keep to reporting conditions), immigration history, family or community ties and factors such as health conditions.

There are often problems with bail hearings such as procedural irregularities, lack of legal representation and interpretation problems.  The Bail Observation Project was set up to monitor these, and wrote a report entitled Immigration Bail Hearings: a Travesty of Justice? detailing the problems and calling for improvements.  This report contains a section on what ought to happen in a bail hearing, which will help you follow what goes on in court.

It’s best to have a legal advisor to represent you in a bail hearing.  You may want a friend or supporter to attend the bail hearing with you, and if you have a public campaign, the campaign group may wish to hold a solidarity protest outside the hearing.  (See future Community Campaigning section).

Who shouldn’t be detained, according to UKBA’s own policy? 

UKBA policy on detention states that the following groups of people should only be detained in very exceptional circumstances:

x     unaccompanied minors (though there have been cases of age disputed minors detained by UKBA as adults, who have in fact been children.

x     pregnant women

x     torture survivors (including rape)

x     people with serious medical conditions or mental health conditions that cannot be appropriately managed in detention

The list of criteria for people who cannot be detained in the Fast Track System is more comprehensive. Although this will not wholly apply for non-fast track cases, it can be useful to look at for ideas of how to argue detention is inappropriate.

Medical cases, torture survivors and Rule 35

Detention Centre rule 35 requires detention centre doctors to report to UKBA “any detained person whose health is likely to be injuriously affected by continued detention or any conditions of detention.”

More information on rule 35 is available from Medical Justice.

Many detainees struggle to access proper healthcare in detention, and rule 35 reports are commonly either not done, or not done properly.   If you think this is the case for you, you should speak to your solicitor and contact Medical Justice.

To be released from detention as a survivor of torture, independent evidence will be needed. Medical Justice may be able to assist with preparing this.

Although UKBA policy wording has recently changed to tighten the definition of people with mental health conditions not suitable to be detained, there has also been case law showing that in very extreme cases, the continued detention of individuals with severe mental health issues has breached Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights: the right not to be tortured, or subjected to inhumane or degrading treatment.

Resources

The Association for Visitors to Immigration Detainees (AVID)

A membership network for visitor groups. They produce an informative monthly newsletter (In Touch), and have useful information about immigration detention on their website.  They are a good organisation to contact if you are thinking about becoming a visitor/befriender to someone in immigration detention, or want information about groups that already visit different immigration removal centres, short-term holding facilities, and people kept under immigration powers in prison.

Detention Action

Formerly the London Detainee Support Group, Detention Action support detainees in Harmondworth and Colnbrook IRCs and campaign on immigration detention issues, particularly the detained fast track system and indefinite detention.

Medical Justice

Medical Justice is a network of asylum detainees, doctors, experts and other supporters exposing and challenging inadequate healthcare provision to immigration detainees.  They provide casework for immigration detainees with serious medical conditions and survivors of torture.

The Detention Forum

The Detention Forum is a loose network of over 30 NGOs who are working on immigration detention issues.  They work together to build a momentum to question the legitimacy of immigration detention which has become such a normal part of the British immigration system.

Bail Immigration for Detainees (BID)

Bail for Immigration Detainees is an independent charity that exists to challenge immigration detention in the UK.  They work with asylum seekers and migrants, in removal centres and prisons, to secure their release from detention.  See above for an explanation of why bail is important.

BID have a London office, an Oxford office and a South office.  See here for details.

Campaign to Close Campsfield

The Campaign to Close Campsfield is a campaign group working to close Campsfield Immigration Removal Centre near Oxford.  It has been active since 1993, holds monthly demonstrations outside Campsfield, monthly campaign meetings in Oxford, and works together with other groups to stop immigration detention, racist deportations and immigration laws enforcing racism.  The Campaign to Close Campsfield currently runs the Bail Observation Project.

Barbed Wire Britain

Barbed Wire Britain is a campaign network against immigration detention.  It aims to organise at a local and national level to end the practice of immigration detention in the UK, to help local groups to get established, to raise the national profile of debate on the issue, to help give voice to detainees and former detainees, and to establish links with like-minded organisations and individuals in other countries.

Fast Track to Despair

The Chief Inspector of the UK Border Agency’s investigation into the Detained Fast Track asylum process, published today, finds ample evidence of the dysfunctions of the Fast Track. Yet the Chief Inspector, John Vine, fails to draw the conclusion that fundamental reform is needed. In contrast to today’s ringing condemnation from the UN High Commission for Refugees, John Vine’s report is curiously muted.

The main reason for this is his remit. A key question for the Chief Inspector is whether the Detained Fast Track removes people quickly. There is no question that it does: hence its popularity with Ministers and the UK Border Agency. But how does it achieve these quick removals?

John Vine appears to give the quality of decision-making in the process a clean bill of health. The reason for this is his focus on appeals upheld as a marker of quality. 93% of refusals are upheld by the courts, he reasons, so the quality of initial decisions must be high. Yet this misses the point about how the Detained Fast Track denies access to justice: detained asylum-seekers find it just as difficult to present their cases effectively in the courts as they do to the UKBA. It is necessary to consider the quality of the whole process, not of the initial decision in isolation.

As a result, John Vine seems to view as minor details the problems that he has found. Asylum-seekers are detained for an average of 11 days before they are interviewed, without access to legal advice, rather than the three to four days foreseen in UKBA policy. The solution? Not to eliminate the delays, but to change the policy to factor in these unnecessary delays.

The absence of effective screening is highlighted by the finding that 30% of asylum-seekers on Fast Track are released, often because they are torture or trafficking survivors. This is bad enough, but we and other NGOs frequently see such unsuitable people go through the Fast Track all the way to removal. Once again, John Vine has no way to assess.

Nevertheless, despite these shortcomings, John Vine’s report marks an important step towards recognition in government of the problematic nature of the Detained Fast Track, long viewed as the pride of the UKBA. The questions that John Vine asks, however limited, are not easily answered, and will not go away.

Particularly now that the UNHCR, which monitors the quality of the Detained Fast Track, is taking a stronger public position. In the words of Roland Schilling, UNHCR’s representative to the UK, “Asylum seekers who come to the UK have often experienced extremely distressing circumstances which have caused them to flee. To be led off to a detention centre – sometimes in handcuffs – as soon as they arrive, is far from a humane way of being treated. These people did nothing other than to ask for protection.”

————

Read Detention Action’s excellent report on the Detained Fast Track system, Fast Track to Despair,  here.

The Chief Inspector’s report in full can be found here.

Coverage of Roland Schilling’s comments can be found in The Guardian and Open Democracy.

]]> http://ncadc.org.uk/blog/2012/02/detention-action-detained-fast-track-denies-access-to-justice/feed/ 0 http://ncadc.org.uk/blog/2012/02/gladys-mabvira-finally-freed-today-after-6-months-in-yarls-wood-she-tells-of-the-injustices-experienced-there/ http://ncadc.org.uk/blog/2012/02/gladys-mabvira-finally-freed-today-after-6-months-in-yarls-wood-she-tells-of-the-injustices-experienced-there/#comments Tue, 14 Feb 2012 14:56:10 +0000 ncadcsouth http://ncadc.org.uk/blog/?p=2496 Gladys Mabvira is an opposition activist from Zimbabwe.  Despite the enormous risks she would face if returned to Zimbabwe, she has time and again been issued with removal directions by the Home Office.  Only her strength in adversity and last minute legal actions kept Gladys with us here in the UK.   She has this morning been released from Yarls Wood IRC on temporary admission, after spending six months detained there.  Gladys has been an inspiration throughout – frequently asking after other individuals for whom NCADC is campaigning – and never giving up her fight for freedom.  Just days before she was released, she wrote this damning statement on the conditions in Yarls Wood:

My Views on Detention by Gladys Mabvira

My name is Gladys Tsitsi Memory Mabvira aged 32 , I have been detained at Yarlswood IRC since 22/8/2011 a total of almost 6months . I have seen so many injustices since being in detention centre , my eyes have been opened and I hope one day all such institutions will be finally closed down for good.

1. There’s a lot of unnecessary detention especially elderly (grandmothers), sick people who can’t even walk and pregnant women at Yarlswood.

2. Mothers are being separated from their children; children are put in foster care why? Because Mom is an over stayer and children on the other hand have right of stay due to being born here. Mothers are being forced to go back to their countries and the children are permanently put in foster care.

3. Similarly again they are placing young adults in detention centre who have literally been here when they were just mere children and have been here for years, grown up here, went to school here, life and family here and because they have no legal status they are being forced to go back to their Birth countries where they know no one, can’t even speak the native or local language. In the process they leave their mothers, fathers, siblings behind in the U.K.

4. Women are kept in Yarlswood for as long as 3 years, currently there is a lady who has been here for 1 year and 7 months. This place is worse than prison because at least in prison there is a time scale of how long you will serve you do your time and go . Yet in Yarlswood there is no timescale of how long you serve detention they can hold you indefinitely and the government is ok with that which I feel is wrong. Myself I have been in detention 6 months!! A drink and drive criminal or someone doing time for burglary could have already served their time in prison and been a free person in possibly 3months at most .Our only crime in Yarlswood is  being an over stayer and asylum seeker where is the justice in that .

5. Women in Yarlswood are not a threat to public society; there are terrorists, murderers and thieves walking freely in the U.K.  There’s a lot of potential and talent wasted by women being locked away this long there are doctors, nurses, accountants, lawyers, teachers, students etc. locked up in Yarlswood. These are people who could be benefiting the economy of the U.K in some way or the other.

6. Most of these women just want to make an honest living for themselves and their families, where is the harm of that. They are grafters that won’t sit on their backside and scrounge off the government. The cost to the tax payer of housing one resident in Yarlswood is rumoured to be at least £400 a week @ the estimated £60 -£70 a day per person. This is taking into account food, clothing, electricity, toiletries, medical services etc.

7. In addition there are other costs I have not accounted for with regards to the escort service for those with removal directions. I have been escorted to the airport twice and can confirm that each time I had 4 escorts!! This is the norm it is usually 3 to 4 escorts assigned to one person to be escorted to their Home country. Most of the time someone is escorted all the way to the airport only to be returned the next day because of as they call it a “FAILED REMOVAL “  where the detainee has shown their unwillingness to go and the airline intervenes and refuses to take the detainee on board . In other cases last minute injunctions have also resulted in a wasted trip to the airport with the detainee returning the next day.

8.Bail or temporary admission which in principle should be applied if one has shown she has credible sureties and a bail address are more than often denied even when you present all this before your caseworker or judge . Perhaps there is more satisfaction in seeing people locked up I don’t know.

9.Some ladies are refused the voluntary assistance having been here some 10 , 11 years .  Once you get removal directions you automatically don’t qualify for voluntary assistance. How then are you supposed to reintegrate back into your societies after this long.

10. Healthcare services are really a slap in the face for those who are genuinely sick or unwell. The healthcare team only give you the minimal treatment which is always “take paracetamol “for any ailment its always “take paracetamol “. This just puts you off going to healthcare as no one takes you seriously when you are unwell its usually assumed people are faking it. I had a friend who was literally rolling on her bed couldn’t walk, couldn’t eat but healthcare were saying there was nothing wrong with her and were refusing to take her to the hospital and she had to rely on paracetamol. There are many such cases.

10. A lot of sites are blocked on the internet which makes it very difficult for those in detention to research and get information or new evidence for their cases. I have found that some of the websites particularly with news articles relating to my case are blocked for instance “news dze Zimbabwe “ , “indaba “, “NCADC “just to name a few .

11. Prices in the shop are ridiculously high bearing in mind we are only paid 71 pence a day into your account. If you have no friends or family to bring you toiletries its either you buy from the shop or you go without. In essence it’s a monopoly thing you just have to buy at the prices set. Food especially as no one can bring you food items not even tinned food or chocolate or crisps.

12. Funny enough you are allowed to work in detention centre yet outside of detention you have no right to work!! Ladies are paid the maximum of £1.50 an hour way below minimum wage. They are only allowed to work a maximum of 9 hours a week which means the maximum wage of anyone in detention per week is just £10 .50 . This I feel is just subtle modern day exploitation if people who are vulnerable and desperate for some form of income.

13. We are treated like prisoners from the moment we enter Yarlswood. All your clothing is searched, you are searched as well and some items are taken from you as the considered banned items!! Some jewellery can be confiscated, belts, and mobile phone have to have no camera or internet. Strangely enough Highlighter Pens are also a banned item but cigarette lighters are allowed?? . This is not an exhaustive list of Banned items but the ones I know.

14. Of late here has been a delay in issuing of mail you can have your mail sitting in reception for days before you can get it and sometimes this is urgent information. In other cases important immigration paperwork is also delivered very late to you and yet deadlines need to be met.

It’s been a journey and an experience and I pray that what I have had to go through no-one else will have to go through not even for a day.

Gladys Mabvira

To subscribe to NCADC news by email, see here

Hornela: the campaign that might have been