Evidence submitted by The Revd Anne Hollinghurst,
Cathedral Chaplain & Chaplain to the University of Derby and
The Revd Canon David Truby, Canon Pastor of Derby Cathedral (AIA
29)
We are writing to you in your capacity as Chairman
of the Select Committee on the Lord Chancellor's Department, in
regards to the conduct of court hearings for asylum seekers. We
understand that you have already been involved with some correspondence
in connection with Iranian asylum seekers linked with Newcastle
Cathedral. At Derby Cathedral we also have a number of asylum
seekers and refugees who have made their home with us, and following
on from a conversation with the Very Revd Nicholas Coulton, until
recently Dean of Newcastle, we felt that we should also like to
share something of our experience in connection with the Home
Office and current appeal system.
In our respective roles of Cathedral/University
Chaplain and Canon Pastor, we have both been involved with asylum
seekers from Iran and elsewhere, who have wished to explore and
then be baptised into the Christian faith. We have every reason
to believe that these cases have been ones of genuine desire to
follow the Christian faith, and their on-going and committed participation
in the life of the Cathedral testifies to this.
Some of this group have now had permission to
stay in this country, but some of our experiences of supporting
them and attending court with them have not been helpful and we
are deeply concerned at the lack of understanding and prejudice
revealed on the part of the Home Office in dealing with their
cases. There seems to be an automatic assumption that a conversion
to the Christian faith can only be a political tactic to strengthen
a case for staying in this country. Whilst a healthy suspicion
has an understandable and rightful part to play in any process
of discernment and decision in regards to a particular case, if
the non-genuiness of a conversion is assumed from the outset,
then there will be a tendency for any hearing to be prejudiced
and unjust. Indeed, in a case that I as Chaplain was involved
with, the original letter the appellant received from the Home
Office tuming down his initial request for asylum was extremely
rude, aggressive and dismissive of his claim to Christian faith
as nothing more than a ploy. Not only did the Home Office have
no basis at all for this assertion, but it was an affront to myself
and my colleague who had prepared him for baptism and to the credibility
of our judgement.
Between us we have attended hearings in both
Nottingham and Birmingham, and have similar experiences to report.
Some of the key points we would like to make are as follows:
— The nature of some of the questions
put to us by representatives of the Home Office revealed an ignorance
in matters of faith and a serious lack of research. It was suggested
for example that my appellant would not be in danger if he went
back to Iran because he did not attend an evangelical church but
the Cathedral. The assumption was that only those from "evangelical
churches" would feel they had to talk about their faith in
proselytising; an Anglican presumably could happily keep quiet!
— Underlying this attitude seems to
be a secular mindset and assumption that faith is simply a private
affair—like some interest/hobby which an individual chooses
to indulge The Christian faith is on the contrary about a whole
way of life and about living that faith out publicly and in public
membership of the church. Whilst deliberately inviting persecution
is not part of the faith's teaching, it is unreasonable to expect
a practising Christian not to own his/her faith in the interests
of personal safety if confronted.
— What appears to be a prejudiced secular
mindset was also revealed by questions that clearly could not
comprehend why someone should want to convert to the Christian
faith, other than for political ends. I found myself in the interesting
position of being asked in court to explain why someone should
be attracted to the faith and what it meant to be a Christian.
Whilst in some ways I quite relished this opportunity (!), I certainly
became aware of why our country needs the recent equal opportunities
legislation that calls for respect for people of all faiths—including
those who are Christians.
— A further lack of understanding of
the background cultures of the asylum seekers themselves was revealed.
For those from countries such as Iran, belief in God in some way
is simply assumed and for many it would be unthinkable not to
have belief. It is not so strange therefore for some to decide
to explore what the faith of the churches here is all about. City-centre
Cathedrals especially are obvious places to go to begin this exploration
and have been prepared to meet this new challenge, often at great
cost. Thus, combined with the sense of dislocation and loss that
many asylum seekers feel, and the need for comfort and friendship,
it is not at all surprising that they are drawn to the churches
as to some of the few places where they are warmly welcomed. It
is also not surprising that those who have experienced a harsh,
fundamentalist Islamic regime should find the teaching and person
of Christ deeply attractive. For the particular Iranian with whom
I have been involved for example, it was hearing the story of
Jesus saving the adulterous woman from stoning by saying "let
the one without sin cast the first stone", that made a deep
impression on him and was significant in his deciding he wanted
to follow this Jesus. He claims to have witnessed such stonings
in the current day streets of Iran.
Overall, we both have come away from our experiences
worried that the Home Office do not seem to have any serious or
clearly thought-out strategy in place with regard to the issue
of asylum seekers. Of course there must be real grounds for allowing
asylum and the evidence needs testing, but the prejudice and lack
of real "homework" done on the part of the Home Office
representatives speaks of nothing more than a desperate bid to
send home as many as possible, bowing no doubt to the dreadful
anti-asylum seeker stance stirred by some sections of the press.
In my own experience, I have to mention that I have nothing but
admiration for the adjudicator, who was meticulous in ensuring
that the hearing went fairly and impartially, and that the Home
Office representatives (and indeed the appellant's own solicitor)
were reprimanded for unfair questions put to me. Other hearings
are not so lucky.
Along with many others who have gained some
inside view into the actuality of how some of these hearings are
conducted, we would be grateful for some move at the highest level
of government, to address the current huge injustices present
in the system. We would welcome any advice about how we could
further support such a move.
The Revd Anne Hollinghurst
Cathedral Chaplain & Chaplain to the University
of Derby
The Revd Canon David Truby
Canon Pastor of Derby Cathedral
August 2003
|
