Open%20borders%20The%20case%20against%20immigration%20controls%20-%20Teresa%20Hayter

Refugees: Tightening the Screw 95
European summit at Tampere in Finland to establish common criteria for
the determination of asylum claims, aiming for a European directive which
would overrule any decision by British judges. The Guardian reported on 12
October 1999:
‘For good or ill, our courts interpret our obligations under the 1951 convention to a
much more liberal degree than almost any other European country,’ claims Mr Straw.
‘One example is the case in which it has been held that women who are in fear of
domestic violence in Pakistan may come under the terms of the convention. Now, I
am concerned about women in fear of domestic violence in Pakistan, but there is no
way it can be realistically argued that was in contemplation when the convention
was put in place.’
But the violence with which Shah and Islam were threatened was not
‘domestic’ violence. Hugo Young wrote an article in the Guardian of 26 June
1999 pointing out that Straw is not a liberal. Straw claimed to be in tune
with working-class voters from Blackburn, and told Hugo Young that
‘liberal’ was ‘not an adjective I use a great deal about myself. I don’t think I
ever have done, actually ... that’s not been part of my lexicon.’ But, Young
said, one way in which he did not resemble his Tory predecessor Michael
Howard was that he believed in the independence of the judges: ‘As a matter
of principle, he says, he would never dream of telling judges what sentences
to pass.’
Asylum Aid, the JCWI, the Refugee Council, lawyers and others have
established a mass of evidence and critical comments on the absurdities and
cruelties of the system of determining asylum claims in Britain, and the waste
of time and money involved in not making proper decisions with good legal
representation at an early stage in the process. Labour, and Straw in
particular, have chosen to ignore all this. The problem is that there is little
point in demanding improvements in legal processes when the real purpose
of Home Office officials is to find whatever pretext they can, however
nonsensical and inhumane, to refuse asylum.
THE CRIMINALISATION OF REFUGEES
Refugees are being criminalised by deliberate government policy. The words
‘asylum seeker’ and ‘illegal immigrant’ are constantly bracketed together.
Technically, about half of all asylum seekers are ‘illegal’ (see below). Worse,
the government forces refugees into reliance on criminal networks through
visa restrictions, carriers’ liability, airport liaison officers and the ‘safe third
country’ rules. Government publications and official meetings throughout
Europe lump together as ‘problems’ immigration and international crime,
the trafficking of people and the trafficking of drugs. The association of
‘immigrant’ and ‘refugee’ with ‘drug smugglers’ and ‘terrorists’ was made
as long ago as the mid-1980s in Europe by the Trevi Group and the Ad Hoc