Report, Expecting Change: the case for ending the immigration detention of pregnant women

As Kate Middleton gives birth to the third heir to the throne, around 100 pregnant women continue to be detained in the UK for immigration purposes each year. A research report by Medical Justice has shown that the current policy of detaining pregnant women is ineffective, unworkable and damaging.
The report, Expecting Change: the case for ending the immigration detention of pregnant women, exposes the plight of innocent pregnant women who seek sanctuary in the UK. These women find themselves locked up and mistreated in the country where they thought they would be safe at last.
One woman who lost 7kg whilst pregnant in immigration detention said: "UKBA [UK Border Agency] put me and my unborn baby's life at risk. I was not a criminal: I never breached the law in the UK. I just claimed asylum and asked for refuge. But UKBA put me there and kept me in a detention centre for seven months as a pregnant woman, for no reason."
Unlike Kate Middleton, the women in our report received inadequate healthcare and the outcomes, in some cases, were tragic. Maria was restrained and forcibly removed to her home country by four escorts. A few months after her return, she suffered a stillbirth. Anna, who had complained for three weeks about abdominal pains, was sent to A&E where she miscarried with two guards in attendance. She subsequently attempted suicide and was admitted into a psychiatric ward.
Asylum seeking women have poorer maternity outcomes than the general population. Many women in the report were victims of rape, torture and trafficking. However, the healthcare they received fell short of the NHS equivalent: staff failed to identify and manage complex pregnancies; inappropriate medication was prescribed; healthcare records were incomplete; interpreters were unavailable; and informed consent was rarely given.
The Home Office does not know how many pregnant women there are in detention. In addition, the research shows that Home Office caseowners rarely factored in a woman's pregnancy when reviewing the decision to continue to detain her. This is against Home Office policy.
The primary purpose of immigration detention is removal from the UK, yet this research and a previous Medical Justice audit based on 75 cases show that only around 5% of pregnant women were successfully removed. This is because in the majority of cases, there is no medically safe way to return them.
Instead of women being removed from the UK, they are released back into the community, often late in their pregnancy, further disrupting their continuity of care. One woman in the sample was moved a total of five times during her pregnancy to different locations, and there was evidence that immigration detention had a negative impact on women's mental health.
Louise Silverton, Director for Midwifery at the Royal College of Midwives said: "The detention of pregnant asylum seekers increases the likelihood of stress, which can risk the health of the unborn baby. Midwives can only work in the context of what they are allowed to do by their managers. The very process of being detained interrupts a woman's fundamental human right to access maternity care. The detention system makes it very difficult for midwives to put women at the centre of their care. We have concerns that the system in place actively inhibits the provision of good care. This is an untenable situation for midwives."
Hundreds of NGOs, along with Royal Colleges, lawyers and human rights activists have called for the disturbing practice of detaining innocent pregnant women, who seek sanctuary in the UK, to end. Detaining pregnant women is not serving any purpose: the costs are great and the damage to women's health can be considerable.

Original article in the Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/natasha-tsangarides/royal-baby-asylum-seekers_b_3653023.html

Immigration: news and resources round up (ook interessant voor ons kaaskopjes)

An exploration of news, multimedia, teaching resources and websites on the hot political and social issue of immigration

UK Immigration is at the top of the list of social issues this week. Stimulate a discussion or debate in class using our round up of resources. Photograph: Steve Parsons/PA Wire/Press Association Images

A recent survey credits immigration as British society's most important social problem. So, in response to the news that a huge backlog of applications to stay in Britain has been found boxed up in the Sheffield offices of the UK Border Agency, we pull together the best news, teaching resources, websites and multimedia on the subject of immigration to the UK.

From the the Guardian

UK Border Agency has backlog dating back 10 years, inspector finds
News story on chief inspector's discovery of boxes in the UKBA's Sheffield offices stashed with more than 16,000 unprocessed applications from migrants for permission to stay in Britain, some of them dating back almost a decade.
Border Agency - Guardian readers' stories
Guardian readers share their stories and experiences of dealing with the UK Border Agency in seeking permission to stay in Britain for themselves or their partners.
Immigration is British society's most important social problem
Results of a survey which shows one in three Brits believe tension between immigrants and people born in the UK is a major cause of division in the UK. And yet, as this article explains, the country is at heart tolerant of those who come to its shores.
Deportation story video
The moving and powerful story of Roseline Akhulu who was diagnosed with kidney failure a few months after arriving in the UK in 2004. After a successful transplant, the UK border agency rejected her claim to remain in UK, but if sent back to Nigeria she will be unable to afford the life-saving drugs she needs.
Estimating future migration from Romania and Bulgaria
On 1 January 2014 British labour markets will be open to Romanian and Bulgarian nationals (the 'A2') as they are to people from the rest of the EU. Many are wondering what the effects will be and the issues are explored here.
UK immigration: five essential charts
Some useful data in chart form on the facts around migration: including how many born in the UK and born elsewhere (and where), migration over time, reasons for coming here and English as main language.

On the Guardian Teacher Network

Immigration and racism from primary sources
Fascinating teaching resource from the People's History Museum which uses real historical sources to explore the subject, including a telegram from Barbados to Britain in 1953 asking the British government to prohibit discrimination on the grounds of race, colour or religion.
Mo Farah - inspiring a generation
This lesson takes us on Mo's amazing journey from Somalia to London 2012. The learning activities give us some insight into the plight of the refugee and the secret of success.
Suitcase stories - tales of immigration
Powerful teaching resource which looks at the tales of four immigrants as they arrive in post-war Britain.
Migration explored
Interactive geography teaching resource which explores a wide range of aspects of immigration, including push and pull factors, comparing immigration to emigration and effects on the host country of a migrant labour system.
Immigration podcast
Made by a history teacher to help her students with their GCSE history WJEC exams on immigration to the USA in the 1920s - but the podcast has a wider appeal to those studying immigration.

The best of the web

Migration Observatory
This is a gem of a website, packed full of info and downloadable data - including tools to create your own bespoke charts.
British Future
Interesting organisation set up to think about the future of Britain to debate identity and integration, migration and opportunity. The British history section of the website is particularly useful. Also see this Ipso Mori poll commissioned by British Future which showed immigrants are most positive about the UK's future.
19 Princelet Street, the museum of immigration and diversity in Europe
Citizenship guru Sir Bernard Crick suggests every schoolchild in England should visit this rarely opened, awesome museum which goes to the heart of who we are today. It is specially opened to school groups by appointment only and is a place where attitudes can be challenged and developed.
Migration watch
Anti-immigration group website provides some provocative material for discussion in the classroom.
Migration stats
Detailed data to crunch through from the Office for National Statistics.

Bron: http://www.guardian.co.uk/teacher-network/teacher-blog/2013/jan/27/immigration-uk-news-resources-education?CMP=twt_gu




Law blog
Klik op +1 als u dit een interessant artikel vindt en Google zal het dan beter zichtbaar maken in de zoekresultaten.

Tweet

Britse Ambstberichten over DRC. O.a. over terugkeer naar Congo / UKBA on DRC

Paul Dillane ‏@Paul_Dillane

UKBA issue two important documents relating to #DRC - 1. Fact Finding Mission Report (November 2012) http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/policyandlaw/coi/drc/ffm-report.pdf?view=Binary … ...

Paul Dillane ‏@Paul_Dillane

... Following from Fact Finding Mission, UKBA issue a Policy Bulletin relating to #DRC asylum claims http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/policyandlaw/countryspecificpolicybulletins/drc-polbulletin?view=Binary …

 

Law blog
Klik op +1 als u dit een interessant artikel vindt en Google zal het dan beter zichtbaar maken in de zoekresultaten.

Tweet

"Gore leugenaars en verdraaiers van de waarheid: de waarheid, vertrouwen en het asielsysteem" (‘Vile liars and truth distorters’: truth, trust and the asylum system)

Melanie Griffiths is a DPhil candidate at Oxford University, with affiliation to the Institute of Social and Cultural Anthropology, and the Centre on Migration, Policy and Society. Her research is on the asylum system in the UK, with a particular focus on refused asylum seekers and immigration detainees. Her doctoral thesis is on truth, trust and identification and she has also written on time and uncertainty in relation to migration. Her email address is melanie.griffiths@sant.ox.ac.uk

Asylum seekers and refused refugees are some of the most mistrusted persons in British society, widely assumed to be manipulating the immigration system. In 2008-10 I conducted 18 months of anthropological fieldwork with asylum seekers living in Oxford or held in immigration detention, as part of a PhD at the University of Oxford researching the asylum system. The majority of the some 300 asylum applicants I spoke to were at some point accused by the UK Border Agency (UKBA) of providing untrue information about who they were and what had happened to them, or requesting asylum when they had no valid claim under the Refugee Convention. Such accusations are crucial, given that the notoriously difficult decision to grant refugee status is often bond up in assessments of the applicant’s honesty or ‘credibility’.

Rather than focus on the ‘traditional’ discussion about the truthfulness of asylum seekers however, I turn the tables on assessments of confusion and incoherence in order to explore how asylum applicants themselves experience, understand and explain the bureaucracy they are embedded in. I argue that deception, uncertainty and mistrust are as much characteristics of asylum seekers’ perspective of the immigration system as the reverse. But whilst an asylum applicant’s inconsistency is routinely interpreted as evidence of lying, that of UKBA representatives is considered indicative of inconsequential errors or even new versions of the ‘truth’.

A culture of disbelief
Many organisations and advocates have argued that there is a ‘culture of disbelief’ within the UKBA, meaning that asylum seekers are met with chronic suspicion and presented as liars or cheats. This has serious implications, given that being branded a liar tends to not only affect the outcome of asylum claims, but likelihood of being detained and ability to obtain legal representation.

Entrenched suspicion and accusations of deception and trickery are not only directed towards asylum seekers and immigration detainees however. Rather, mistrust is experienced by and of most persons involved in the refugee system, including asylum seekers mistrusting the UKBA. For some, this tipped over into believing that the authorities deliberately lied to them. Scores claimed that the UKBA distorted reality in order to tarnish reputations.

Confusion and inconsistency
Mistrust of the UKBA arises from an immigration system that is deeply confusing and imbued with uncertainty, a high error rate and sometimes apparently arbitrary decision-making. Working in this field, one frequently witnesses mistakes made by the UKBA, from their use of multiple different names or dates of birth for a person within a single letter, to extremes such as confusing which individual has been deported or incorrectly bestowing refugee status.

In addition to mistakes, people spoke of UKBA decision-making as unfair and unfathomable. Release from immigration detention for example often appears arbitrary or inexplicable. People can be released suddenly and unexpectedly, only to be promptly re-detained.

Contradiction and the irrational
At times however, my informants not only expressed the opinion that the immigration system was unpredictable and confusing, but that it was downright irrational. This included instances in which the UKBA held multiple, but incompatible, positions. Twice I knew individuals who were imprisoned for using false identity documents, whilst simultaneously the UKBA insisted that their ‘real’ identities were those on the false document. I spoke to a handful of people who had been refused refugee status because they had not committed identity offences, but had travelled with ‘real’ passports or visas, which was taken to prove that their government was not seeking them. I knew one man accused of absconding from the authorities at a time when he was working as a police informer and another when he was actually in prison.

New truths and unlevel playing fields
‘When immigration lie it is acceptable, but when I speak they call it deception.  They have language for it.’ (detainee Roger)

The article suggests that although trust and honesty are issues central to the whole British asylum system, a reductive emphasis on the honesty of asylum applicants overlooks wider systemic uncertainty and mistrust. Asylum applicants feel that the authorities make arbitrary and unfair decisions that they cannot make sense of and that hinder their ability to know what to say and do. For them, the state is not a powerful monolithic entity, but a collection of administrators who are in permanent contradiction. That policymakers and bureaucrats might make errors or unfathomable, inconsistent decisions is not in itself surprising. However, two points make this particularly pertinent in the context of the asylum and immigration detention systems.

Firstly, for asylum seekers and detainees, the immigration system is not simply a bureaucracy that they are sometimes frustratingly forced to engage with. Rather, especially for those incarcerated, it is one that frames their entire lives and in which mistakes have serious repercussions for their immediate lives and potential futures. Secondly, there is an irony in a system that is itself imbued with error and confusion, placing such great primacy on the truthfulness of asylum seekers, that narrative inconsistencies can undermine the chances of a person receiving refugee protection. The British asylum process operates under the assumption that ‘truthful’ applicants present their stories in a ‘coherent and consistent’ manner, attributes that are often missing in the authorities’ own responses. As such, asylum seekers are held to a higher standard of truth-telling than those making decisions about their claims.

I would go even further and suggest that the ‘truth value’ of UKBA representatives is considered far greater than those subject to the asylum and detention systems, allowing the former to insist on particular versions of the ‘truth’, and threaten individuals who resist it with criminal repercussion. This commonly includes disputes over the nationality of failed asylum seekers, with individuals imprisoned for not cooperating with removal to a country they insist is not their own. Furthermore, errors made but denied by the UKBA can become a new version of the ‘truth’, with applicants accused of deception if they do not conform to them.

I do not suggest that asylum seekers do not ‘lie’ (as problematic as that term is), merely that an examination of the context in which they are embedded may help illuminate systemic tensions and individual’s decision-making. In fact, lying cam even be interpreted as a rational response to negotiating a complex and inconsistent immigration system. The reality of my fieldsite was messy and complicated and although I frequently encountered scenarios which I knew involved untruths, my uncertainty as to where the ‘truth’ lay and the nagging sense of irrationality that I often felt, was as much the case in conversations with the UKBA as with asylum seekers.

This is a much shortened version of the full article. The journal, Anthropology Today, however has kindly provided open access to the article for six months. You can read the full article here.

Please forward the article to anyone you think would be interested. And if you would like to share your thoughts, opinions or own experience then please do join the discussion here.

Bron: http://ncadc.org.uk/blog/2012/11/vile-liars-and-truth-distorters-truth-trust-and-the-asylum-system/




Law blog
Klik op +1 als u dit een interessant artikel vindt en Google zal het dan beter zichtbaar maken in de zoekresultaten.

Tweet

Afghan interpreter 'betrayed' as UK rejects asylum bid

By Caroline Wyatt Defence correspondent, BBC News

The MoD said it values the contribution of local Afghans who support its military operations

An Afghan man who was badly injured by a Taliban bomb while working as an interpreter for British forces in Afghanistan has been told he has not been granted asylum in Britain.

The UK Border Agency (UKBA) told the 25-year-old that his asylum application was being rejected because he had given insufficient proof of his identity and work.
It also said that his claims of death threats to himself and his family by the Taliban were not accepted.
The man - whom the BBC has agreed not to name fully on its website in order to protect his family in Afghanistan - said he was bitterly disappointed by the decision.
Mohammed has shown the BBC pieces of evidence - including letters from several of his British Army bosses and nine identity cards - which make it clear he worked for British forces in Afghanistan for around five years and for American forces for two years prior to that.
His body still bears the scars of the Taliban bomb which blew up the unit he was working with in Sangin on 14 November 2007 - an attack that killed the British Army captain, John McDermid.
The Afghan interpreter suffered shrapnel wounds to the head, neck, arms and chest and was deaf in one ear for over a year. He still suffers from headaches and depression.
'They betray me'

Continue reading the main story

“Start Quote

I was receiving phone calls telling me that we will cut your head off, your family's head off - and we will kill everybody in your family”

Afghan interpreter

Mohammed claimed asylum in the UK in 2011 and has been living in Leicester while waiting for a ruling from the UKBA.

But the agency told Mohammed he had provided insufficient proof of his identity and work with British forces, despite showing nine military ID cards, all genuine, as well as several references and photos of himself being treated for his injuries at Camp Bastion's field hospital.
At least 21 Afghan interpreters have been killed in the past five years and many more wounded.
Most worry about what will happen to them and their families when British and Nato forces leave.
Mohammed says he fears for his life back at home as a direct result of his work with British forces in Afghanistan.
"We believe that what we were doing was helping our people, our country.
"It is a risk, because people in Afghanistan look at interpreters as those who betrayed my people, my country and my religion by working for the British forces.
"Now they betray me."
The UKBA said there was no evidence that his life was under threat if he had remained in his homeland, even though Mohammed received threatening calls and letters from the Taliban.
"The Taliban look at us as spies," Mohammed told the BBC.
"I was receiving phone calls telling me that we will cut your head off, your family's head off - and we will kill everybody in your family.
"This thing was happening almost every day."
Local staff 'valued' The UKBA also said there were "significant inconsistencies" in the interpreter's claim, but it would "consider any new information which came to light". It said Mohammed would be able to appeal.
Among its reasons for refusing his claim for asylum are inconsistent spellings of his Afghan name in English, although that is not unusual in names that have been translated from Pashtun or Dari.

Continue reading the main story

THE TALIBAN

• Emerged in Afghanistan in 1994
• Mainly supported by ethnic Pashtuns
• Toppled after US-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001

In a statement, a Ministry of Defence spokesperson said: "The MoD is aware of the case and is investigating the circumstances.

"We value the contribution of all our locally employed staff, who play an extremely important role in supporting military operations in Afghanistan.
"Immigration matters are not the responsibility of the Ministry of Defence."
Army officers say they are now doing their best to try to find records of Mohammed's employment in Afghanistan to give to the UKBA.
Several officers wrote references for Mohammed, but agency officials complained that most were photocopies and that some referees had misspelled his name.
Defence Secretary Philip Hammond told parliament in September that the MoD was working on a programme to ensure the protection of those who had worked with the British after 2014 - when UK combat forces are due to leave Afghanistan.
Mohammed, whose asylum case has already been raised in parliament, has said he will appeal.


Bron: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-19807191



Law blog
Klik op +1 als u dit een interessant artikel vindt en Google zal het dan beter zichtbaar maken in de zoekresultaten.

Tweet

Home Office to reconsider asylum plea of Afghan interpreter blown up on British front line patrol after extraordinary U-turn

Father of three, 26, suffered horrific wounds in Taliban attack that killed Army captain

Border Agency told him 14 months after application was submitted that he had no evidence of being either Afghan or under threat

Change of heart after complaints from MPs and media coverage

British Army translator Mohammad Rafi Hottak pictured showing his scars following the Taliban blast

The Home Office made an extraordinary U-turn tonight and withdrew a letter telling an Afghan interpreter blown up by the Taliban while on patrol with British troops his asylum application was rejected.
The rare about-turn came hours after publicity highlighting the farcical handling of the case of Mohammad Rafi Hottak by the controversial UK Border Agency, whose refusal of the claim was met with disbelief and anger by the military and MPs.
Last night the Agency said it would look again at the case after it appeared that the most basic checks had not been made by officers investigating the 26 year-old's claim despite it having been lodged 14 months ago.
A delighted Mr Hottak hailed the decision as a 'victory for common sense', adding that: ' The reasons given for rejection were unbelievable and showed thorough checks had just not been made in my case.
'I now have renewed hope but I am still cautious given what has happened… this latest decision to cancel the letter shows at least that people are still working to help me find justice. I still can't believe the letter I was sent.'
In that astonishing letter of rejection, which raised new questions about the handling of asylum cases, Mr Hottak was told one of the reasons he would not be allowed to build a new life in Britain was because Home Office investigators did not have evidence of how he was injured.
Incredibly, the father of three was also told he had provided no evidence he was an Afghan, he had the same fingerprints as another asylum claimant and there was no evidence his life was under threat if he had remained in his homeland.

 

In fact, all the details could have been simply obtained from Ministry of Defence records, including those of how Mr Hottak was blown up by an improvised explosives device – a blast that killed a British officer – and that his life was saved by surgeons in hospital at Camp Bastion.
A devastated Mr Hottak, whose asylum case has already been raised in Parliament, claimed: 'It is as if the Home Office has been blind to my case and what happened to me and fellow interpreters in Afghanistan. I have army officers who I worked with supporting my case but this appears to mean nothing.

Captain John McDermid, pictured with his wife, Gill, was killed in the blast that injured Mr Hottak

'I am depressed and I will appeal, I always saw Britain as a just country that I was proud to serve, that provided shelter for those whose lives were at risk but this has shaken that belief. All I want is a better future for myself and my kids.'
The rejection shocked both MPs and those in the military who worked beside Mr Hottak in the most dangerous parts of Helmand province.
Julian Brazier MP, a member of the Defence select Committee, said he would raise the matter with both Immigration and Armed Forces ministers while Sir Menzies Campbell, the former Liberal Democrat leader, called for Home Secretary Theresa May to investigate.
One soldier has written to the Home Office speaking at his 'disappointment' as the handling of a 'hero's' case, saying Britain was turning its back on him and branding him a liar.
Faced with personal death threats and those to his family, Mr Hottak had paid £8,000 to people smugglers more than a year ago, to reach Britain, walking into a Central London police station to make his plea for asylum.
Fluent in three languages, including English, Mr Hottak worked for the US military as an interpreter in 2004 before switching to the British two years later following in the footsteps of his elder brother.
It was on the morning of November 14, 2007 that while on foot patrol with a joint British Afghan force near the centre of Sangin, Helmand province, an IED was triggered.
Mr Hottak's boss Captain John McDermid, 43, of 2nd Battalion The Yorkshire Regiment was killed, Mr Hottak badly wounded.
He still recalls the huge flash, the noise and the searing pain as he was thrown several metres into the air before ending up bleeding profusely as Army medics rushed to the aid of the injured.
The interpreter suffered horrific shrapnel wounds to the head, neck, arms and chest that required 170 stitches. He also temporarily lost the use of his hand and was deaf in one ear for more than a year.

Julian Brazier, MP, (left) said he would raise the matter with immigration and Armed Forces ministers while Sir Menzies Campbell said he would ask Home Secretary Theresa May (right) to investigate before the U-turn

Mr Hottak was injured in a blast while patrolling with UK troops in Helmand Province, Afghanistan (file picture)

Thanks to the work of doctors, Mr Hottak returned to work after three months but was unfit for front line duties and was given a job at Camp Souter, the main British recruitment base in Kabul, the Afghan capital.
His role involved interviewing prospective interpreters as well as liasing with the families of colleagues killed or injured, sometimes returning the remains of the dead to their families.
It was then that he began to receive death threats both by letter and telephone – threats he told British officers about. Some threatened him, some his family. He moved house and changed telephones but the threats continued.

Keith Vaz described Mr Hottak's treatment as 'a disgrace'

One Taliban letter referred to Mr Hottak and his brother by name. It warned: 'They are doing a very important job for the aggressive infidels, so we want you to catch them and deal with them through Islamic Sharia,' said the note, hand-written in Pashtu, the main language in southern Afghanistan.
'If you can't catch these two, catch their father so they will come to rescue him.'
At one point a British officer wrote him a note to take to a senior police officer in Kabul to ask him for help. But Mr Hottak said: 'The first thing the police officer said was, “You work for the Nato forces so they should look after you, not us. There are hundreds of people like you and I cannot provide bodyguards for all of them'."
Underlining the threats was the fact that the Taliban had been responsible for the kidnap and murders of translators as well as the intimidation of their families who were warned that unless their relatives left the British, they would become targets.
More than 40 Afghan translators are said to have resigned from working with the British because of the threats.
Mr Hottak, who has not seen his youngest child, is now living in a hostel in Leicester, where he is unable to work and receives £36 a week to live on.
He is doing a course at a local college and says : 'Other translators have been granted asylum but they are refusing me on the weakest possible reasons. I have Army officers who vouch for who I am, what happened to me and the fact that I served loyally and well with British troops yet this seems to count for very little.'
He added : 'I am desperate and depressed, I risked my life to help British soldiers, my family and Afghanistan and it seems to count for nothing.
'I read reports of killers and criminals who have been granted asylum – it seems that they are desirable but people like me who have never done anything wrong and whose life will be in danger in my own home because I worked with British troops are not. It is a strange situation.'
Keith Vaz, chairman of the Commons Home Affairs Committee and Mr Hottak's MP, has called the young man's treatment a disgrace.
Mr Hottak said that one reason for his asylum rejection was that investigators could not confirm that his surname was Afghan – something that could have been done simply through Google.
Another was that military identification cards supporting the application contained different spellings of his name – Afghan names are spelt in a variety of ways when written in English.
Last night a UKBA spokesperson said: ‘The increased level of publicity around this case has led to new and significant information, which was not provided during the application process, coming to light today.
'As a result of this additional information, we have informed Mr Hottak this evening that we have withdrawn our decision and will fully review his application.’

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2211760/Asylum-application-rejected-Afghan-interpreter-blown-Taliban-patrol-British-troops.html#ixzz28EMVg7CN
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook





Law blog
Klik op +1 als u dit een interessant artikel vindt en Google zal het dan beter zichtbaar maken in de zoekresultaten.

Tweet

Britse IND waarschuwt voor frauderende visa agenten in Thailand en Vietnam

Warning about unscrupulous visa agents in Vietnam and Thailand

24 September 2012

You should be aware that there are unscrupulous agents working in the visa industry in Vietnam. These agents have no connection to the UK Border Agency or our commercial partner VFS Global. They are unable to make any guarantees on the success of a UK visa application.
When submitting visa applications you should ensure that you are dealing with a genuine employee of VFS or UK Border Agency staff.
You should note that you will not be asked to pay money to book an appointment with the visa application centre and you will receive an official receipt for payment of your visa fee and any other additional services requested. You will not be asked to forward any additional payment after your visa application has been submitted.
The UK Border Agency and VFS Global can take no responsibility for events which take place outside their offices.


Bron:  http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/newsarticles/2012/september/38-agents-vietnam

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/newsarticles/2012/september/37-agents-thailand


Law blog
Klik op +1 als u dit een interessant artikel vindt en Google zal het dan beter zichtbaar maken in de zoekresultaten.

Tweet

Tamils to be deported despite clear torture evidence

Two chartered flights bound for Sri Lanka are scheduled to take off next week, as evidence of human rights abuses mounts

Many Tamils in the UK have sought treatment for torture injuries they received in Sri Lanka, particularly burns. Photograph: Dinuka Liyanawatte/Reuters

The UK is to go ahead with a mass removal of Tamils back to Sri Lanka next week despite mounting evidence from human rights group that many of them could be tortured on their return.
At least two and possibly three chartered flights are scheduled to leave the UK from Wednesday carrying an unknown number of Sri Lankan Tamils whose pleas to remain in the UK have been refused. The UK Border Agency (UKBA) refuses to discuss such flights until they have landed.
The Home Office says it only removes people who face no risk of torture, but Freedom from Torture and Human Rights Watch both argue that the government has severely underestimated this possibility when it comes to returned Tamils, many of whom are routinely arrested and quizzed about links with the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) and activities in the UK, with torture often playing a part.
Such removals were halted while the Sri Lankan government fought a brutal civil war with the Tamil separatist group but resumed after the LTTE's military defeat in 2009.
In June the Guardian interviewed one man who recounted being beaten, hung and asphyxiated after being forcibly returned from the UK, testimony supported by a mass of scarring.
Despite the concerns, the UKBA is believed to be planning its biggest removal yet of Tamils, with two or possibly three flights leaving on successive days. David Mepham, the UK head of Human Rights Watch, said the organisation had documented a series of cases of returned Tamils facing mistreatment.
He said: "Given the very serious risk of torture facing many Tamils returned from this country, the UK should immediately impose a moratorium on these returns, pending a thorough review of UK policy in this area and the introduction of new risk assessment guidelines."
Freedom from Torture has put together perhaps the most comprehensive study yet of the perils faced by Tamils returning to Sri Lanka from the UK. It tracked 24 cases of mainly young Tamils living legally in Britain who travelled back to Sri Lanka voluntarily, for example to visit family, and said they were detained and tortured. In half these cases the Tamils, once back in the UK, were referred to charities by NHS staff after they sought treatment for injuries, particularly burns caused by cigarettes or other heated objects.
The organisation's 16-page report noted: "This rate of referrals involving torture following return from the UK to a particular country is, to the best of our knowledge, unprecedented since Freedom from Torture was founded in 1985."
Such cases, the group concludes, show that even Tamils with LTTE associations who were previously allowed to leave Sri Lanka safely to the UK faced risks if they returned. It said: "The cases demonstrate that the fact the individuals did not suffer adverse consequences because of this association in the past does not necessarily have a bearing on risk on return now.
"It is a combination of both residence in the UK and an actual or perceived association at any level with the LTTE which places individuals at risk of torture and inhuman and degrading treatment in Sri Lanka."
Many of those who voluntarily returned were detained within days and questioned at length about their activities in the UK, indicating Tamils who had lived in Britain possibly faced an increased risk of mistreatment.
Types of torture commonly employed, according to testimonies, included beatings with cement-filled plastic pipes or clubs, whipping with cable, burns, partial asphyxiation using petrol-filled plastic bags, and sexual assault, including rape.
The 24 people were examined once back in the UK, with a majority of them showing significant physical signs of torture. One group of returnees had and an average of 17 scars each which could be attributed to likely torture.
In the interview in June, the Tamil man who was among two dozen other asylum seekers deported by the Home Office the previous year said he had been tortured over the space of 17 days. His torturers accused him of passing on to British officials information about previous beatings at the hands of state officials and other human rights abuses, to ruin diplomatic relations between the two countries, he said.
A UK Border Agency spokesman said: "The UK has a proud record of offering sanctuary to those who need it, but people who do not have a genuine need for our protection must return to their home country.
"We only undertake returns to Sri Lanka when we are satisfied that the individual has no international protection needs. The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that not all Tamil asylum seekers require protection."
The Sri Lankan High Commission in London did not respond to a request for comment.

Bron: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/sep/14/tamils-deported-despite-torture-evidence?CMP=twt_gu




Law blog
Klik op +1 als u dit een interessant artikel vindt en Google zal het dan beter zichtbaar maken in de zoekresultaten.

Tweet

Britse IND heeft last van criminelen die doen alsof ze hem zijn

Warning about fake UK Border Agency websites and calls

13 August 2012

We are aware of a number of scam e-mails and websites claiming to be sent and operated by us; and of calls made by people posing as our staff.

The scams that we are aware of include:

• Foreign criminals advertising fake UK jobs on the internet. Individuals that apply are told they have a job and are directed to a link to pay for visa and work permit fees. These websites are not operated by us, and you should not click on any of the links or pay any money.
• Students at a number of UK universities have received calls from individuals who claim they work for the UK Border Agency, giving a false name and a return phone number. These calls are not from the UK Border Agency. The caller may appear to be genuine and convincing and explain that there is a serious problem with your immigration status, and that you need to send a payment as soon as possible to prevent further action including deportation.
• A request for payment of a deposit as proof that you have sufficient funds to support your arrival in the UK until your first salary is received.

The scams which we are aware of have been reported by us to action fraud, the UK's national fraud reporting centre. There may also be other scams which have not been brought to our attention.

If you believe that you received a suspicious call or e-mail, or come across a suspicious website:

• Do not give out any personal information, or confirm that any personal information they have is correct
• Do not make any payment
• Do report the matter online to action fraud (www.actionfraud.police.uk) or by calling Action Fraud on 0300 123 2040

You should always access the official UK Border Agency website by typing: www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk into your internet browser. Official UK government websites will have a .gov.uk at the end of their website address. When e-mailing us, you should also ensure that the e-mail address is genuine. The following example are what you would expect when receiving or sending an email to us: name.surname@UK Border Agency.gsi.gov.uk or name.surname@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk.

Sometimes these exact addresses will appear on the screen, but when you click on the address, a different e-mail address will be selected, so you should also be aware of this.

The UK government will never use free e-mail accounts such as hotmail, yahoomail, or gmail to contact you.

For further information on genuine UK Border Agency visa application fees, please see the Fees for our services page. If you wish to check if letters or emails are genuine, please visit our countries list page on this website and select your country for contact details.

Bron: http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/newsarticles/2012/august/13-genuine-website




Law blog
Klik op +1 als u dit een interessant artikel vindt en Google zal het dan beter zichtbaar maken in de zoekresultaten.

Tweet