Bolivian asylum seekers were falsely imprisoned and children traumatised after being held at centre
A refugee has won a settlement of £100,000 from the Home Office after it admitted falsely imprisoning her and her children at an immigration detention centre.
Carmen Quiroga, originally from Bolivia, spent 42 days at Oakington detention centre in Cambridgeshire with her son and three daughters, aged between three and 11, in what her solicitor describes as "appalling conditions" that were unsuitable for children, and despite the fact that a judicial review into her asylum plea was continuing for much of that period.
In what is thought to be one of the highest payments for a case of this nature, the high court today approved the settlement, offered as compensation for the unlawful detention in 2004 and for serious psychological injuries that it accepted the children had suffered. Such was the distress they experienced that six years later the family have required "significant psychiatric help" to overcome it.
Quiroga's solicitors had argued that the detention was illegal because it was not used as a last resort, the welfare of the children was not given priority, the use of force in detaining the family was "entirely disproportionate" and the family were held for almost a month even after the judicial review process was launched. They also alleged that the family had suffered inhuman and degrading treatment in contravention of the European convention on human rights.
Quiroga, 36, remains too traumatised to talk publicly about the circumstances of "appalling violence" that forced her to flee Bolivia in 2002 or about the situation of the children's father, but the family have all since been granted British passports.
Speaking exclusively to the Guardian this week, Quiroga said: "This case was about being heard, and it's in this way that [I hope] what happened to me won't happen to other people." The trauma, she said, "is not something you are inventing. You feel it, you live it, and it's there all the time." Part of the settlement was an agreement by the Home Office to outline to Quiroga the steps it has taken to prevent the abuse recurring for other families.
Quiroga applied for asylum as soon as she arrived in Britain in 2002, but after her initial claim and appeal were refused, the latter without her knowledge, the family were forced from their beds on the morning of 21 October 2004 by police and security guards, given an hour to pack and then bundled in a police van and taken without explanation to Oakington, which at the time Quiroga thought was a prison.
The family's solicitors, Bhatt Murphy, argued that they had suffered verbal abuse and threats from detention centre staff, were denied access to medicines and appropriate children's food and, during two unsuccessful attempts to deport them by plane, were threatened with violence.
On one occasion Quiroga was struck by a contracted security guard when she failed to maintain eye contact, as the children looked on. They were freed on bail in December 2004, 28 days after a judicial review of the appeal decision had been launched, and awarded British nationality four years later.
Quiroga sought psychiatric help after seeing her youngest daughter strip-searching and abusing her dolls, imitating the behaviour she witnessed at Oakington.
Sarah Campbell, research and policy manager at Bail for Immigration Detainees, a charity that provides legal support to people in Quiroga's position, said the "shocking" case demonstrated the serious harm caused to children by detention.
"We regularly see the horrendous effects detention has on children ‑ many of the children we work with experience depression, weight loss and even self-harm."
She said there is no evidence that locking up children is helpful in immigration control, added: "The fact that this family had an ongoing legal case while in detention, and were eventually granted status to remain, raises very serious questions about why they were detained at all."
Bron: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jan/29/quiroga-asylum-detention-payout
Informatie over het Nederlandse vreemdelingenrecht en nationaliteitsrecht, inburgering, diversiteit, expats, vluchtelingen en gezinshereniging enz. Maar ook vacatures voor juristen die bezig willen houden in een internationale setting of zich in het vreemdelingenrecht willen verdiepen.
- immigration law blog on Dutch visa, residence permits, citizenship, nationality etc. -
Redactie mevr. mr M.W.W. Raspe (berichten uit de media zijn niet altijd ook haar mening)
Abonneren op:
Reacties posten (Atom)
Aanbevolen post
Wytzia Raspe over vluchtelingen, AZC’s, cruiseschepen en mensensmokkelaars
Mr. van de week is Wytzia Raspe. Zij is 25 jaar jurist vreemdelingenrecht in allerlei verschillende rollen. Sinds 2005 schrijft en blogt z...
-
Huisje Boompje Nanny (HBN) is een toonaangevend full-service Au Pair bureau dat bemiddelt tussen au pairs uit zowel binnen als buiten Europa...
-
Grensoverschrijdende dienstverlening Als aan de volgende 3 voorwaarden is voldaan, hoeft de werkgever geen werkvergunning aan te vragen voor...
-
Het is een beetje 'Liefdewerk oudpapier" want je krijgt alleen reiskosten :( De NOvA zoekt een Advocaat voor de adviescommissie vre...
-
DIT BELEID IS AFGESCHAFT. Tegenwoordig probeer ik het voor klanten op basis van artikel 8 EVRM of op basis van Richtlijn 2004/28 (in de vol...
-
Wat ga je doen? Als teammanager geef je leiding aan teams werkzaam op verschillende opvanglocaties voor Oekraïense vluchtelingen in Rotterda...
-
Spanje zal de komende drie jaar bijna een miljoen illegale migranten een verblijfsvergunning geven. Dat heeft de Spaanse minister Saiz van I...
-
Amice Advocaten Vacatures Vacatures Amice Advocaten te Utrecht Vacature m/v jurist migratierecht bij Amice Advocaten Utrecht Amice Advocat...
-
De tijd dat immigratiebeperking vooral een rechts verkiezingsthema was, lijkt voorbij nu ook de linkse oppositie een rem wil zetten op het a...
-
Kijk hier: https://www.inburgeren.nl/u-gaat-inburgeren/ . Ook voor de verschillen tussen de oude en de nieuwe Wet Inburgering.
-
Als ik deze vader was ging ik in Hoger Beroep. De Afdeling vindt immers tegenwoordig dat er echt moet worden gehoord. In zo'n zaak als d...
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten