APPENDIX 29
Memorandum submitted by Mr Rezgar Ghafor,
Oxfordshire Social Services Department
The issue of removals of failed asylum applicants
can not be addressed without taking into consideration the whole
of the current asylum and immigration system. The way in which
asylum applications are currently considered has a direct impact
on the issue of removals. While the Home Secretary's concerns
over removal of failed applicants is well founded his focus on
this particular group may well not achieve the desired results.
This is mainly due to the fact that government targets for removal
are not realistic and fail to take into account the legal aspects
of the whole of asylum claim process. The major problem starts
with the backlog on asylum application. Far too many applicants
are waiting far too long for a decision on their claims. Many
people wait in some cases up to five years for a decision. Regardless
of the reasons behind the delays in dealing with asylum applications
such a practice does infringe their human rights. The implications
of such a delay on the applicants are wide ranging from denial
of the right to work to freedom of travel and movement. Also,
such long delays inevitably allow for the applicants to settle
in the UK and establish family and friend connections and support.
This eventually leads to the establishment of a legal basis for
the right to remain in the UK, regardless of the outcome of their
asylum application.
The government may well need to examine its
objectives for setting targets for removals. What realistic objectives
can be achieved by speedy removals? Is it to avoid making the
UK a "soft touch" for immigrants? If that is the case,
speedy removals can not be utilised as a deterrent measure since
such a practice may well be in breach of the UK governments obligations
towards the UN refugee conventions. It is imperative to underline
the need for identification of a new mechanism that clearly separates
between economic immigrants and genuine asylum seekers. More importantly
to recognise and acknowledge the role of the economic migrants
in the modern British economy.
Lack of recognition between economic migrants
and asylum seekers also adds further complications on the whole
of asylum system and consequently on removal. Although asylum
claims are considered individually on their merits, general Home
Office policy guidelines that do not recognise between economic
migrant and genuine asylum seekers can be discriminating against
those who are genuinely fleeing persecution.
Recognition of the need for economic migrants
regardless of both demographic and economic advantage could hugely
advance and develop a truly multicultural and diverse Britain.
It must be acknowledged that the Welfare system does encourage
many economic migrants to exploit the weaknesses in the system
under the name of "Asylum Seekers". This understandably
creates resentment amongst the population. A separate system that
deals with the economic migrant should facilitate easier access
or entry to Britain but must enforce tougher conditions for remaining
in the UK. All entrants as "economic migrants" should
not be allowed any state benefits and be expected to support themselves
and their families. Such a system would also have a direct impact
on the problem of illegal "human trafficking" as many
people "migrants" would no longer need to use the illegal
services of the smugglers. Entry visas for "economic migrant"
should be given for six month. For the duration of this visa,
the entrants should be expected to find employment. Should the
entrants fail to do so, then removal procedures could commence
immediately. A removal under such a system would be more realistic
and the removed person's cooperation would be expected since they
would already be aware of the conditions of their entry to the
UK at the first place.
Setting removal targets causes considerable
pressure on all the relevant authorities including those charged
with carrying out the removals. Often these authorities prime
concern is to achieve their targets regardless of set procedures.
As a result most of the removals are carried out inhumanly. It
must be acknowledged that any removal is to some extent is inhuman
as most of failed applicants would not wish to be repatriated.
The removal enforcement authority's efforts
are often ineffective for the following reasons.
1. Lack of communication and liaison between
the Home Office, enforcement authorities and the local authorities.
2. Bureaucratic and lengthy procedures by
among various Home Office departments often leads to the collapse
of the case for removal.
3. Failure of the enforcement officers to
follow the appropriate procedures leading to the mis-identification
of the asylum seekers and the arrest of the wrong persons.
4. Lack of interest of the enforcement officers
in dealing with the asylum seekers as human beings as opposed
to dealing with them as criminals.
5. Removal procedures have no consideration
for resettlement allowances (in terms of financial support) for
the failed asylum applicant who is up for deportation.
October 2002
| 
