What Moves
the World to Move?

              Never Doubt

The Butchers Apron

           Nellie de jongh

       Winning Campaigns


No-Deportations - Residence Papers for All
News & Views Monday 13th September to Sunday 19th September 2021


Emma Raducanu UK's Most Famous Migrant

99% of the media reporting on Emma Raducanu refers to her as British

Not that you will find it on the front pages of the media or the lead story on all-news channels.

Emma Raducanu Raducanu was born on 13 November 2002 in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Her father, Ian, is from Bucharest in Romania, and her mother, Renee, is from Sheyang in China. The family migrated to Britain in 2004

Emma and her parents are welcome here - John O for No-Deportations

New Statement Of Changes to the Immigration Rules: HC 617

On 10 September 2021 the Home Office published a statement of changes to the Immigration Rules (HC 617). It is 183 pages long and makes adjustments in quite a number of areas. Some of the main changes are:

Banning entry to the UK with an ID card rather than a passport (with exceptions for some existing residents)­ - Tweaks to existing resettlement schemes for Afghans, including granting indefinite leave to remain from the outset­ - TA new International Sportsperson route, consolidating what were the Tier 2 and Tier 5 sporting visas­ - TTweaks to Global Talent, making it slightly easier to get an endorsement, and doubling the number of awards that mean no endorsement is required­ - ­ - TChanges to EU Settlement Scheme family permits, including “to allow a joining family member to apply to the EUSS whilst in the UK as a visitor”­ - TIceland and India being added to the Youth Mobility Scheme­ - TA new “Appendix Settlement Protection” for refugees to get ILR­ - TIncorporation of some coronavirus concessions into the Rules­ - As the explanatory memo (pdf) outlines, there are many other minor, technical or corrective changes. If any prove to be particularly important, we’ll highlight them. If you spot something earth-shattering, let us know.

Read more: Freemovement, https://is.gd/IJXcMa

Can Children be Deported from the UK?

Yes. Children can be removed from the UK as part of a family. They can, on paper, also be deported in their own right for criminal offending: the Home Secretary’s power of deportation under the Immigration Act 1971 is not limited to under-18s, and the Home Office has specific guidance on applying that power to children. That said, under that guidance, the physical removal will “usually” be delayed until the child turns 18.

Removal as part of a family. In ordinary language, “deportation” is used to mean foreign nationals being kicked out of a country that they have no right to live in. In that sense, children are “deported” all the time along with their parents: over the past five calendar years, 7,134 under-18s were removed from the UK. The vast majority of those were categorised as voluntary removals; 91 were enforced.

Legally speaking, though, deportation is different from administrative removal. Someone who merely lacks permission to be in the UK can be removed under section 10 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999. Deportation is a separate power in section 3(5) of the Immigration Act 1971:

Read more: Freemovement, https://is.gd/bjXBfU

After Deprivation of Citizenship Comes Months or Years in Limbo

The Home Office is routinely missing its target for issuing new residence

permits to people who lose their British citizenship, figures obtained under the Freedom of Information Act show. Those deprived of their citizenship for (often historic) deception are promised a decision on their human rights claim to remain in the UK within eight weeks, but on average it takes eight months. In the meantime, those affected are effectively rendered unauthorised migrants with no right to work.

Deprivation of citizenship. The power for the Home Secretary to deprive someone of their British citizenship is in section 40 of the British Nationality Act 1981. It comes in two flavours. The most notorious is deprivation “for the public good” under section 40(2), widely used against those held to be involved in or adjacent to terrorism, such as Shamima Begum. That type of deprivation is not relevant here.

The second flavour is deprivation for deception. This is section 40(3) of the 1981 Act:

Read more: Freemovement, https://is.gd/E4Otw2

Asylum Backlog Reaches Over 70,000 Despite a Decline In Claims

New data from the Home Office has revealed that over 70,000 people were waiting for a decision on their initial asylum claim in the UK as of June 2021. This means that the asylum backlog is now 9 times higher than it was a decade ago.

The backlog has increased by 73% in just the past two years, despite the fact that the number of asylum applications has been decreasing in this time. In the year ending June 2021 the UK received 37,325 applications for asylum, this number was a 9% decrease on the previous year.

Refugee resettlements practically came to a halt during the COVID-19 pandemic, but the new data also shows that the number or resettlements continues to remain low. In the second quarter of 2021 just 308 refugees were resettled in the UK, significantly lower than the quarterly average of 1,400 from 2016 to 2019.

Source: IAS, https://is.gd/AyXPja

More Concerns Over Use of Former Barracks as Asylum Accommodation

All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Immigration Detention on Monday 6th September, published an important interim report on its inquiry into the Home Office's use of large-scale, institutional sites to house destitute asylum seekers. This week's interim report presents a summary of three oral evidence sessions held with key witnesses in July. A number of serious concerns were raised by witnesses, with the report noting these included "unsanitary, crowded, 'prison-like' conditions at the sites; chronic levels of sleep deprivation; ineffective safeguarding; inadequate access to legal advice and healthcare; problematic changes in the processing of residents' asylum claims; and intimidation and mistreatment of both residents and NGO workers supporting them."

The report notes that the cramped conditions and lack of privacy at the sites meant residents had to hold sensitive discussions with their lawyers within earshot of other residents and staff, which had implications for disclosure, confidentiality and the person's mental health. Sleep deprivation caused by conditions at the sites added further problems. One resident told the APPG inquiry: "I'm mentally and physically drained all the time, and this doesn't put me into the right mindset for engaging with my asylum claim." Mechanisms for identifying and safeguarding vulnerable people before and during their placement at the sites were inadequate, the APPG found.

The report states: "In the absence of effective safeguarding measures, the Home Office appeared to be relying on lawyers and legal interventions to identify vulnerable people. Many vulnerable people had been, and continued to be, moved out of the sites as a result of such interventions, having experienced additional suffering during their stay. It was not acceptable to rely on such interventions as a substitute for proper safeguarding measures, not least given the barriers to effective legal support faced by residents." On the subject of access to legal advice, the report added: "Residents needed legal advice on asylum and public law matters, but faced many barriers in terms of accessing it – and little was being done to address this.

Read more: Electronic Immigration Network, https://is.gd/t0P2Tt



Opinions Regarding Immigration Bail

HMCIP Inspections of Charter Flights

Self-Harm in Immigration Detention

36 Deaths Across the UK Detention Estate

UK Human Rights and Democracy 2020

Hunger Strikes in Immigration Detention

Charter Flights January 2016 Through December 2020

A History of

Immigration Solicitors

Villainous Mr O