The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance (ECRI) on Tuesday 2nd March, published its fourth report on the United Kingdom which deals with racism, xenophobia, anti-Semitism and intolerance in the UK.
ECRI’s Chair, Nils Muiznieks, pointed out positive steps in fighting discrimination, but also expressed concern that racist incidents had become more frequent, police powers were exercised in a manner that disproportionately affected minority groups, Gypsies and Travellers still faced serious discrimination and asylum-seekers remained in a vulnerable position.
European commission against Racism and Intolerance publishes new report on United Kingdom
http://tinyurl.com/Council-of-Europe
Download full report: ECRi Report.PDF
Extract: Refugees and asylum-seekers
171. In its third report, EGRI made a series of recommendations with respect to the policies, legislation and practice in place to deal with refugees and asylum¬seekers. It made a series of recommendations with respect to the detention of asylum-seekers, and to ensure that the procedures in force for seeking asylum in the United Kingdom enable those in need of protection to have the merits of their individual cases thoroughly examined. It recommended that the authorities ensure that no asylum seeker is left destitute pending the examination of her or his claim and that any measures taken to provide asylum seekers with accommodation and support should not separate asylum seekers from the rest of society but should instead facilitate the early integration of those who will be allowed to stay. It also recommended that the authorities take the lead in placing public debate on asylum securely in the realm of human rights.
172. EGRI notes that since its third report, the UK Border Agency has introduced a new model for processing asylum claims. The aim of the model is to achieve faster conclusions to cases, recognise genuine refugees more quickly and repatriate applicants who have been refused asylum effectively. It also aims to achieve better quality decisions and thus reduce the number of appeals made. In January 2009, a report of the National Audit Office?" noted that there had been improvements in the management of asylum applications as a result of the introduction of this model but pointed to some outstanding issues. EGRI is concerned in particular that full screening interviews are not carried out at the point of application in more than one quarter of cases, increasing the risk that key information about the claim will be missed and that persons will be wrongly detained. It notes in this context that applicants dealt with via "fast¬track" procedures have very little time to produce evidence in support of their claim, as decisions-makers have only three days in which to make a ruling in these cases, and that the failure rate of asylum applications treated via fast¬track proceedings is accordingly very high. The use of a list of countries "likely to be suitable for the detained fast-track process" has also been criticised, particularly as - despite the inclusion of a proviso in the relevant instruction, that it should not be taken as implying any departure from the fundamental principle that all asylum claims are looked at on a case-by-case basis and decided on their individual merits - the existence of such a list may in itself detract in practice from the thorough examination of individual cases on their merits 102. EGRI remains concerned about the quality of decisions: it notes that applicants have only one avenue of redress to correct a decision, which is an appeal to the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal, and that of the more than 70% of applicants who appeal to this body, between 20 and 25% of appeals are upheld. EGRI stresses that the high proportion of decisions overturned on appeal highlights the need to continue to improve the quality of decisions initially taken, for example through careful implementation of the recommendations made in this respect as part of the UNHCR Quality Initiative Project.
173. As regards detentions, ECRI notes with concern that there is no maximum limit on the length of detention of asylum-seekers. Moreover, despite a new duty imposed on the Secretary of State to make arrangements to ensure that asylum functions are discharged having regard to the need to safeguard and promote the welfare of children who are in the United Kingdom 103, there is at present no maximum limit on the length of detention of children who are detained with their families. Furthermore, asylum-seekers detained under fast¬track procedures reportedly often do not have adequate access to legal assistance, and as a result, may in practice remain in detention without challenge. NGOs working in this field emphasise moreover that the detained fast-track procedure is used too frequently, and exceptions are not properly applied; the National Audit Office has also pointed out that if more information about the potential complexity and appropriateness of cases for detention were gathered by the UK Border Agency at the start of the process, fewer cases would need to be removed from the detained fast-track process 104. While the UK authorities emphasise that the detained fast-track process aims to deal quickly with cases suitable for this process and is part of a wider government strategy aimed at streamlining the asylum process, many NGOs express concern that in their view, the main aim of detaining asylum-seekers is to prevent them from establishing contacts with British society. ECRI stresses that the detention of asylum seekers should be used only as a last resort, when no other viable options are available.
174. ECRI remains deeply concerned about destitution affecting asylum-seekers, refused asylum-seekers and refugees in the United Kingdom, resulting from the refusal to allow most asylum-seekers to seek work''" and difficulties in gaining access to asylum support or rapid access to work following recognition of refugee status. Research carried out by refugee agencies shows that destitution is widespread, especially among asylum-seekers whose claims have been refused, and that it commonly affects individuals for long periods, and in some cases affects children. Those affected include persons whose application for asylum has been rejected but who cannot leave the United Kingdom, for example because they are stateless or cannot obtain travel documents, or because it is unsafe for them to return. Similar issues were examined in detail by the Joint Committee on Human Rights, in a report published on 30 March 2007106, in which it also made a number of recommendations to which ECRI hopes the authorities will give effect. ECRI notes the deeply worrying conclusion of the Joint Committee on Human Rights that there has been a deliberate policy of destitution of refused asylum¬seekers, giving rise to breaches of international human rights standards?", It furthermore notes with deep concern that, despite some measures taken to relax the rules in this field, access to health care remains a significant problem both for failed asylum-seekers, who have been liable for most non-emergency hospital charges since 2004, and for asylum-seekers whose claims are still being processed, who may for example be discouraged from seeking treatment to which they are entitled for fear of being charged, or wrongly denied treatment if they refuse to pay, or experience difficulties registering with a GP, for example due to problems proving their address lOB. ECRI understands that the United Kingdom authorities intend to put the results of a review of healthcare for foreign nationals to public consultation in autumn 2009, and hopes that this will provide an opportunity to address the problems faced by asylum-seekers and failed asylum-seekers in this field.
175. ECRI observes that the tone of public discourse with respect to asylum¬seekers remains frequently hostile. While the most virulent reporting seems to have abated to some extent as the number of asylum-seekers arriving in the United Kingdom has dropped, significant sections of the media, and notably the tabloid press, have continued to portray those seeking international protection in a relentlessly negative light, for example as criminals, abusers of the system or bogus asylum-seekers. Negative views have also been reflected in statements to the press by some politicians. ECRI is deeply concerned that such attitudes not only tend to poison public opinion against all asylum¬seekers, however genuine their claim, but are also translated into laws and policies that increasingly treat asylum-seekers as though they were criminals. The UNHCR and other organisations working with refugees have repeatedly expressed concerns in this field, most recently with respect to clauses in the Draft (Partial) Immigration and Citizenship Bill that was published in July 2008, which provide that it is an offence for asylum-seekers knowingly to enter the United Kingdom without a valid travel document?". ECRI shares these concerns and emphasises the need to respect the rights of individuals enshrined in the 1951 Refugee Convention.
176. ECRI recommends that the United Kingdom authorities intensify their efforts to improve the quality of decisions on asylum applications. It draws the authorities' attention to the need to ensure that screening procedures are applied in a manner that allows all the key facts to be laid out in each case, and that adequate time is allowed for asylum-seekers to substantiate their case.
177. ECRI urges the United Kingdom authorities not to treat undocumented asylum-seekers as criminals. It urges the authorities to ensure that the detention of asylum-seekers is used only as a last resort, and that individual decisions to detain are subject to thorough and effective judicial scrutiny. ECRI again recommends that the authorities ensure that the detention of children remains strictly limited to cases where it is absolutely necessary. It further recommends that any measures taken to provide asylum seekers with accommodation and support outside detention centres should not separate asylum seekers from the rest of society but rather facilitate the early integration of those who will be allowed to stay.
178. ECRI urges the authorities of the United Kingdom to ensure that no asylum seeker is left destitute during or after the examination of her or his claim, and emphasises in this respect that many asylum-seekers whose claims are rejected cannot return to their countries of origin, and, in the absence of the right to work, have no means to support themselves independently. It urges the authorities to take all necessary measures to ensure that asylum-seekers and failed asylum-seekers are not deprived of necessary health-care.
179. ECRI again strongly recommends that the authorities take the lead in placing public debate on asylum squarely in the realm of human rights. It recommends that the authorities encourage a more balanced public debate on asylum, ensuring that the need for international protection is understood and respected. |