Memorandum submitted by Naz Project London
1. This Memorandum arises from the ongoing
lack of coherence in Government Departments relative to HIV policy
and practice, specifically in relation to the goal of universal
access to HIV/AIDS treatment relative to those who have failed
in their asylum applications in the UK and to the deportation
of those people living with HIV who have no right to reside in
the UK.
2. Naz Project London is the longest established
and largest Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) initiated and led
sexual health agency in London. We are also the UK National Focal
Point for "AIDS and Mobility Europe", an EU wide project
on HIV and migrant/mobile populations. We currently work with
the following BME and refugee communities in London: Eritrean,
Ethiopian, Portuguese speaking (especially Brazilian, Angolan
and Mozambican), Somali, South Asian, and Spanish speaking Latin
American. We provide sexual health promotion and HIV/STI prevention,
support and care for people living with HIV, and a dedicated sexual
health and HIV policy and research capacity. Our service users
are about equally split between those who are heterosexual and
those who are men who have sex with men. Our sister organisation,
Naz Foundation International, works mainly overseas in South Asia
with men who have sex with men.
3. The Department for International Development
is an active and admirable partner in achieving the UNAIDS goal
of universal access to ARV treatments. However, this cannot be
said about the coherence of HIV policy and practice when taking
into account the positions of the Department of Health and the
Home Office in the UK: there continues to be a serious lack of
coherence.
4. I would like to bring the following to
the attention of the Committee.
5. It is now widely understood that failed
BME asylum seekers in the UK who had previously begun ARV treatment
are entitled to continue such treatment. However, this information
is still not getting out to the relevant BME communities: there
is still confusion on the ground about whether or not failed asylums
seekers can access ARV treatment and under what conditions. In
addition, there appears to be no provision for access to treatment
for asylum seekers who were not on ARV treatment prior to failing
their asylum application. A public health rationale aiming at
disease control for such an exclusion is lacking.
6. Deportations of failed asylum seekers
living with HIV are continuing. These deportations include countries
where ARV treatment is not practically available, eg, in terms
of amount of medication available countrywide, geographic accessibility
across the country, and costs (both for the medication as well
as for travel to access it). In many such countries, HIV stigma
is high indicating that access to appropriate HIV care, support
and (secondary) prevention is seriously lacking. We know of serious
rejection—including grievous domestic violence and family
rejection—among some of our BME communities right here in
the UK towards members who live with HIV. The situation is more
serious in some home country contexts like Colombia, India or
Somalia. The Home Office does not have a reputable methodology
or accurate evidence base relative to determining what ARV medications
are actually available in overseas communities.
7. I would therefore like to recommend the
following to the Committee:
8. That the Committee urge the Department
of Health to commit itself to the UNAIDS goal of universal access
and ensure that all failed asylum seekers who are living with
HIV have access to ARV treatment while they remain in the UK.
9. That the Committee request that the Home
Office freely open to public and scientific scrutiny the methodology
or mechanism it uses to provide information about which countries
have accessible ARV treatments and can therefore serve as deportation
locations.
10. That the Committee ensure that a listing
is prepared of countries where local legislation and/or custom
blocks universal access to prevention, treatment, care or support
especially for women and young females, sex workers, intravenous
drug users, and men who have sex with men.
11. That the Committee invite those pharmaceutical
companies that produce ARV treatments—and so are able to
quantify the availability of ARV medication in various countries—to
produce, either separately or in partnership, a publicly available
database of this information.
Bryan Teixeira, Chief Executive
October 2006
| 
