Hosted by www.ijjo.org

Chapter 11 | Outcomes of Asylum Applications
with the Albanian Government. However, by May
2006 no such formal agreement had been reached
between the two governments, nor had a contract
been signed with ICMC. A draft UASC Returns
Process Map has been produced by the Immigration
and Nationality Directorate. This indicates that
after an unaccompanied or separated child has
exhausted all of his or her appeal rights, the local
authority will have up to 42 days to conduct an
assessment of need. There will then be an interagency
meeting between the Immigration and
Nationality Directorate and the local authority
to discuss how the need identified can best be met
by a “Match and Transfer” pathway to return. The
meeting will be chaired by someone from the Immigration
and Nationality Directorate and it will
ultimately be IND’s decision as to whether the unaccompanied
or separated child will be returned.
Neither local authority social services departments
nor the Department for Education and Skills
appear to have played a major role in devising the
programme. The scoping exercise carried out in
Albania was subcontracted to an independent
consultant who had been a social worker but had
no experience of returning unaccompanied or
separated children to their countries of origin.
According to the Immigration and Nationality
Directorate, the best interests of the unaccompanied
or separated child will always be an important
consideration in any decision on removal but this
will not take precedence over the need to maintain
effective immigration control. In relation to “best
interests,” IND clearly has a preconception about a
child’s best interests, and this may not accord with
child protection standards usually applied in the
U.K. Even before the pilot project started the Directorate
suggested that “it is not always in the best
interests of [a] child to remain in the United Kingdom
separated from [his or her] family or community.
In most cases the best interest of the child will be
met by returning a child to either their families or
to other appropriate arrangements in [his or her]
country of origin.” 51 A clear difficulty with this presumption
is that it fails to take into account not
only the number of children who may have been
trafficked from their countries of origin, at times
with the agreement of their families, but also child
protection issues which may arise from the sheer
fact that a parent has sent a child alone to a foreign
and distant country.
Non-governmental organizations have reacted
negatively to the proposals to return children to their
countries of origin, as have some local authorities
and a number of foster carers with whom unaccompanied
children are living. 52
“We are most concerned about the recent move to
return unaccompanied children [to their countries
of origin] as it is clear that the best interests of
the child will be a secondary consideration to the
determination to demonstrate tough enforcement
measures.” 53
“We have grave concerns about the Government’s
plans to return unaccompanied children to Albania.
We are in principle opposed to returning children
where this is not consistent with domestic and
international standards for the care and protection
of children.”
Hosted by www.ijjo.org
137