Immigration Rules (Statement of Changes)
Minister for Immigration (James Brokenshire): My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary is today laying before the House a statement of changes in immigration rules.
The rules are being changed to make clear the circumstances in which we can withdraw refugee status and leave. The changes clarify terminology and make clear that refugee status can be withdrawn where evidence emerges that such status was obtained by deception or where it is clear that protection is no longer needed. It can also be withdrawn where someone commits a serious crime or is a considered a danger to our national security such that they do not deserve our protection and all the benefits that come with that status.
Existing provisions on the revocation of refugee status are also being extended to include those who instigate or otherwise participate in acts covered by article 1F of the refugee convention, including those who engage in extremist activities that represent a threat to our national security.
New rules are being introduced to make asylum claims from EU nationals inadmissible unless exceptional circumstances apply. Such claims are currently processed through the asylum system, which includes an interview and detailed written decision. This goes beyond our international obligations and there is provision under EU law to treat claims from EU nationals as inadmissible on the basis that member states are deemed to be safe countries. We need to do all we can to dissuade abusive claims and considering claims from EU nationals uses resources that I believe are better focused on those who genuinely need protection.
There is no right of appeal against a decision to treat a claim from an EU national as inadmissible. Claims that meet the exceptional circumstances criteria will still be considered but the onus will be on the individual to set out the reasons why their case is exceptional. Human rights issues raised through the appropriate application process will still be considered in accordance with our obligations under the Human Rights Act.
I am also implementing the changes to the English language requirements for settlement and citizenship announced in March. These changes will ensure that the same security assurances apply to English language qualifications whenever they are used in the immigration and citizenship system.
The statement also makes changes to the immigration rules on skilled work routes, administrative review and on family and private life.
House of Commons, Written Statements: 29 Oct 2015 : Column 10WS
Expulsion of Criminal to China Would Expose Him to Risk of Facing the Death Penalty
In Chamber judgment! in the case of A.L. (X.W.l v. Russia (application no. 44095/14) the European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously: that the applicant's forcible return to China would give rise to a violation of Article 2 (right to life) and Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) of the European Convention on Human Rights; andvthat there had been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the conditions of the applicant's detention in a detention centre for aliens and on account of the conditions of his detention at a police station. The case concerned, in particular, the complaint by a man residing in Russia and wanted as a criminal suspect in China that if forcibly returned to China, he would be at risk of being convicted and sentenced to death. The Court considered that, given that the exclusion order against the applicant mentioned explicitly that he would be deported if he did not leave Russia before the stated deadline and that his Russian passport had been seized, he was at imminent risk of deportation to China where he might be sentenced to death. Russia was bound by an obligation, under the Convention, not to expose him to such risk.
Judgment A.L. (X.W.) v. Russia - impending expulsion to China.pdf
We Are the Majority and we Will Stand up to Racism
Refugees Welcome Here
Public Rally 6.30pm Wednesday 4th November 2015
Camden Centre, Judd Street, Kings Cross, London WC1H 9JE
Diane Abbott MP Shadow Secretary of State for International Development
Claude Moraes MEP
Owen Jones Journalist and writer
Francesca Martinez Stand up comedian
Shahrar Ali Green Party Deputy Leader
Kevin Courtney Deputy General Secretary NUT
Anna Musgrave Refugee Council
Sabby Dhalu & Weyman Bennett Unite Against Fascism / Stand up to racism & others tbc
As Winter approaches we are witnessing harrowing pictures of Refugees across Europe facing inhumane conditions including Chloera, hypothermia as borders are shut against them. There remains no political agreement on finding a solution to the biggest migration of refugees to Europe since WW2. Recent EU summits have focussed on seeking agreement with Turkey on stopping the flow to Europe of refugees, but no agreement on how provide protection to many thousands still stranded in Hungary, Calais and other parts of the EU.
Recently the government's approach has been strongly criticised by Church of England Bishops, the UN, Law Lords, retired judges, lawyers, Benedict Cumberbatch, Banksy and a range of cross party politicians.
Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein, the UN high commissioner for human rights in an interview with the Guardian said the language surrounding the issue reminded him of the 1938 Evian conference, when countries including the US, the UK and Australia refused to take in substantial numbers of Jewish refugees fleeing Hitler's annexation of Austria on the grounds that they would destabilise their societies and strain their economies.
Hundreds of thousands have marched under the slogan "Refugees Welcome Here" and many more have donated aid to refugees unable to find shelter and sanctuary. We must continue to pressure the government to take more refugees.
Join us on Wednesday 4 November 2015.
‘We Receive a lot of Patients From IRCs Quite Often They’re cuffed
An employee of the American prisons company GEO Group told a London inquest yesterday that it was a matter of “routine” to handcuff immigration detainees receiving treatment at an NHS hospital. And a doctor at Hillingdon Hospital told the inquest: “We receive a lot of patients from detention centres and quite often they’re cuffed.” The remarks came on the sixth day of the inquest into the death of Alois Dvorzak, an 84 year old Canadian whose handcuff and chain were removed only after he stopped breathing. Dvorzak, a retired electrical engineer, was held at Harmondsworth, an immigration removal centre near Heathrow Airport then run by GEO Group, after immigration officers denied him entry to the UK.
Read more: Phil Miller, 27/10/2015
A conversation between: Matthew Carr – writer and journalist
Frances Webber - legal expert on EU immigration and human rights law, author of Borderline Justice
Ali Ceesay - spokesperson, Children of Calais
moderated by Liz Fekete - IRR Director
Wednesday 11 November 2015, 6-8pm
Institute of Race Relations, 2-6 Leeke Street, London WC1X 9HS
The seminar is also a book launch, Matthew Carr's Fortress Europe: Inside the War Against Immigration
R (Application of Patel) v SSHD (Duration of Leave - Policy)
IJR  UKUT 561 (IAC)
(Application for Judicial Review – Dismissed)
[Obiter: (1) The decision of the High Court in R (SM & Others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department  EWHC 1144 (Admin) relating to the 2009 Discretionary Leave policy and instruction only applies to cases where the decision to grant leave to remain was made prior to 24 June 2013.
(2) There is no obligation on the Secretary of State to grant ILR or to consider granting ILR in circumstances where no formal application for ILR has been made.
(3) It is legitimate for the Secretary of State to grant leave to remain for 30 months on an application that is decided on or after 9 July 2012 irrespective of when the application was made unless it was made between 9 July 2012 and 6 September 2012: see para  of Singh and Khalid v Secretary of State for the Home Department  EWCA Civ 74.]
Judge Eshun: This judicial review concerns a challenge brought by the applicant, a citizen of India, born on 1 April 1977. He has two dependants, namely, his wife, Daxaben Amitkumar Patel, born on 1 September 1977 and their child, a son, V, born on 23 December 2007. They are also Indian nationals. The applicant challenges the decision of the respondent, Secretary of State for the Home Department, on 10 July 2013 to grant him and his dependants discretionary leave to remain in the United Kingdom for a period of 30 months after his appeal was allowed in the First-tier Tribunal outside the Immigration Rules.
2. Permission to bring judicial review proceedings was granted by Upper Tribunal Judge Gleeson at an oral hearing on 22 September 2014.
3. The applicant raised two grounds. The first ground contended that the Secretary of State acted inconsistently with her duty under Section 55 of the Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009 ("the 2009 Act") as elucidated in R (SM & Others) v Secretary of State for the Home Department  EWHC 1144 (Admin); and secondly the Secretary of State acted unlawfully in applying the provisions introduced by HC 194 and associated policies because the relevant implementation provision provides that they would not apply to applications made before 9 July 2012.
84. The applicant's application for judicial review is dismissed.
Immigration: Applications [Missing information]
Kate Osamor: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if she will take steps to clarify the administrative requirements on applicants for indefinite leave to remain (a) in general and (b) in respect of whether the date on a letter from her Department on the date on which it is received by an applicant dictates the period within which the applicant must respond.
James Brokenshire: The administrative requirements to which applicants for indefinite leave to remain are subject are set out at https://www.gov.uk/browse/visas-immigration/settle-in-the-uk. Once the applicant has navigated to the correct application form, detailed guidance relevant to the specific application is provided. This information is reviewed regularly, with a view to ensuring it is as clear as possible. Applicants may receive letters requesting further information. Two of these specify that the information must be submitted within a given number of working days of the date of the letter, while the third does not. This is now being clarified.
Hansard Monday, 26 October 2015 page 57
Police Eject Asylum Supporter Protestors From St Pancras Station
Protesters demonstrating in support of migrants and refugees have been ejected from St Pancras Station in London, according to the Metropolitan Police. Disorder broke out after demonstrators broke through a police line and entered the Eurostar terminal at about 18:00 BST, a Met spokesman said. Smoke bombs and other items were thrown before protestors were "swiftly ejected" from the building, he said. There have been no injuries or arrests, he added. A post on the website of a group called Calais Migrant Solidarity suggest it had organised the protest in "solidarity with the Calais migrants". British Transport Police, which is jointly policing the protest with the Met, said its officers were facilitating a peaceful protest when "a number of other individuals arrived at the station causing disorder, and missiles, including smoke bombs were thrown at police officers". "This group were dispersed by police," it said.
Read more: BBC News, 24/10/2015