The UK Border Agency
34. Our predecessor Committee identified a problem
in relation to the way in which the UK Border Agency handled British
victims who had been forced into marriage abroad and who were
reluctant to sponsor a visa for their spouse to enter the UK.
Reluctant sponsors face very great danger if their family becomes
aware that they have raised their concerns with the authorities.
The Committee concluded that:
The fact that visa sponsors are only interviewed
when they themselves come forward as a reluctant sponsor means
that forced marriage is unlikely to be detected unless the victim
takes the initiative. Second, even when a forced marriage victim
alerts the authorities, one twelfth of the visas refused on this
basis are currently overturned at appeal by the Asylum and Immigration
Tribunal, because the reluctant sponsor is unwilling to make a
public statement in evidence to the Tribunal.
We recommend that interviews with visa sponsors take
place not only when reluctant sponsors come forward themselves,
but also in cases where there is a suspicion of forced marriage
by immigration and visa-granting authorities, or other third parties.
We consider it essential that a power of refusal
without the need for an evidential statement be attached to visa
applications in cases of reluctant sponsors. The Code of Practice
which has been proposed by the UK Border Agency, may provide a
mechanism for implementing this measure.[46]
35. Jasvinder Sanghera stated that the situation
has not changed since our predecessor's Report, adding that:
Very often our victims require their disclosures
to be confidential. That is the key significant thing here because
they don't wish that information to be passed on to their family
or passed on to the person abroad.[47]
She did, however, note some more positive developments
in relation to victim support:
One of the things that has changed, I would say,
and that we need to build on is the relationship with the Forced
Marriage Unit and support services in supporting the victim when
that is happening. We need to build on that.[48]
36. We have also previously raised with the UK
Border Agency the plight of estranged or abused partners who are
under pressure from their families to sign a request for their
spouses to have indefinite leave to remain in the UK, or who simply
want to be kept informed of the progress of their spouse's application,
but are treated as 'third parties' in the application process.
The response from the UK Border Agency has been that it is not
possible for their staff to pass on this information to spouses
unless the visa applicant has consented to their data being passed
on to a third party, in order for them to meet their obligations
under the Data Protection Act.
37. We wrote to the Information Commissioner
to clarify the law in this area. He replied that "very often"
it is appropriate that the UK Border Agency treats resident spouses
as a third party and does not disclose information about the applicant
to them as their personal data is protected by the Data Protection
Act. However, he added that:
The UK Border Agency should bear in mind that in
cases where an application is based on marital status and the
estranged or abused spouse is referred to in the visa application
form, the information being requested may well be the personal
data of both the resident spouse and the applicant spouse. In
these cases, the resident spouse would have a direct interest
in the application and they would have a right under the Data
Protection Act to make a subject access request for some of the
information ... In broad terms the Agency is required in these
situations to weigh the right of the resident spouse seeking access
to the personal data that relates to both of them, against the
right of the applicant spouse not to have their personal data
disclosed without their consent ...
It should also be born in mind that in any case the
Data Protection Act recognises that sometimes it is appropriate
to disclose personal data in circumstances which would otherwise
breach the Act. This is where there is an overriding reason to
disclose the information. This
might be where a failure to disclose would prejudice the prevention
or detection of crime, or where a disclosure is necessary in connection
with any legal proceedings. In these cases, the normal restrictions
on disclosure do not apply. Again the Border Agency would have
to consider the application of these exemptions on a case by case
basis.[49]
38. We are disappointed by the lack of progress
made by the UK Border Agency to resolve the issue of reluctant
sponsors being unable to deny the foreign national whom they have
been forced to marry a visa because they are afraid that their
intervention will become known to their family, who might take
action against them. We therefore reiterate our predecessors'
call for a power of refusal without the need for an evidential
statement to be attached to visa applications in cases of reluctant
sponsors.
39. We are also surprised that estranged or
abused spouses are routinely treated as 'third parties' under
the Data Protection Act by the UK Border Agency in respect of
their partner's application for indefinite leave to remain. While
we recognise that data protection issues must be taken into account,
there are instances where exemptions can be made and the Agency
is therefore permitted to disclose information to a spouse. We
were pleased to note the Information Commissioner's assertion
that the Data Protection Act recognises that sometimes it is appropriate
to disclose personal data in circumstances which would otherwise
breach the Act. The UK Border Agency should acknowledge this,
and encourage its staff to make decisions about disclosure on
a case-by-case basis, with the aim of ensuring that British spouses
have every opportunity to alert the immigration authorities in
confidence to cases of marriage breakdown. Clamping down on these
immigration abuses is essential first and foremost in order to
protect current and future victims of forced marriage, but also
to form part of a controlled immigration policy.
Voluntary sector agencies
40. Cris McCurley drew attention to the important
role played by black and minority ethnic women's frontline domestic
abuse projects in tackling forced marriage, a view shared by our
predecessors. She told us it "cannot be understated":
There is no substitute for the knowledge and expertise
that they can provide through their input and if the first response
is to refer to them for advice and assistance, then we are likely
to get it right. That assumes that they will be there, and adequately
funded.
What prevents (white) professional services from
giving the right response is a complex and multi-faceted issue.
Fear of being labelled racist is at the heart of it, but there
is also ... the "culture of disbelief". I see this
routinely in my work and awareness raising is essential, but then
again so is taking expert advice from those who know from the
inside.[50]
41. Karma Nirvana runs the Honour Network Helpline,
a national helpline for victims of forced marriage and "honour"-based
violence, launched in 2008. In the first year they received 2,532
calls; in 2009 the number of calls more than doubled to 5,599;
and in 2010 they received 4,815 calls (the decrease a result of
a reduction in service because of a funding cut). 63% of their
callers do not report to agencies such as police, teachers and
GPs, [51]
which demonstrates the significance of the helpline as a means
of support for victims.
42. Our predecessors welcomed the launch of the
helpline in April 2008 and urged the Government to ensure that
it was "fully resourced to be able to operate effectively."[52]
Karma Nirvana told us that they would be forced to close the
helpline in April 2011 if they did not receive further funding
but "sadly to date we have not been invited to discuss sustaining
the Helpline despite our pleas."[53]
The Government has pledged to allocate £900,000 a year for
national helplines for the victims of domestic violence, but this
does not appear to include helplines with specialist expertise
in forced marriage.[54]
We are awaiting further information from the Secretary of State
for Justice on the outcome of this particular application. We
have also been made aware that other specialist services for black
and minority ethnic victims of violence, including Southall Black
Sisters, are particularly under threat from the current round
of spending cuts.[55]
43. Specialist services run by the voluntary
sector provide a vital means of support to individuals at risk
of forced marriage, who are often failed by statutory agencies
or do not feel able to approach them; 63% of the thousands of
callers to the Honour Network Helpline do not contact statutory
agencies. We understand that a number of such specialist services,
including the highly-respected organisation Southall Black Sisters
and the Honour Network Helpline run by Karma Nirvana, are under
threat of closure due to potential withdrawal of funding from
Government or local authorities. It is our view that the Government
should urge local authorities to support these local services
and both Government and local authorities should move quickly
to make funding decisions affecting these services. The closure
of these services would materially damage the UK's ability to
protect and support victims and potential victims of forced marriages,
and the Government should take steps to avoid this outcome.
27 
