Hosted by www.ijjo.org

More documents

Recommendations

Info

C H A P T E R 1 4 Policy and Practice Recommendations 14.1 Conclusion This report documents a complex pattern of concern, neglect, and suspicion towards unaccompanied or separated child asylum seekers in the U.K. It illustrates the tension between child protection mandates and preoccupations about excessive immigration, a tension which drives and underlies attitudes and policies throughout the asylum determination process. While our research revealed striking examples of good practice, of careful reform and of sensitive intervention, it also documents disturbing evidence of discrimination against children, of indifference towards the hardships they encounter and of wilful violation of international human rights treaty obligations. Among the features of U.K. policy which we commend are the careful reforms relating to holistic age determination processes and the inclusion of unaccompanied and separated child asylum seekers within the overall provisions of the Children Act. We also endorse the many local initiatives, by both statutory and non-governmental organizations, to support and assist children in their attempts to secure asylum and a permanent, caring environment for their future life in the U.K., from the provision of carers to accompany children to interviews and court hearings and nurturing fostering arrangements, to meticulous and patient preparation of child specific pleadings and submissions. On the other hand, we note with Hosted by www.ijjo.org 177
concern the plethora of evidence of unsatisfactory policy and practice. Most notable is the difference between adult and child asylum grant rates, a difference which indicates that children are much less likely to be granted asylum, and therefore to be eligible for long term protection, irrespective of their needs and eligibility. Other defects include the neglect of child specific information on persecution, a failure to apply a liberal “benefit of the doubt” approach to evidence provided by children, despite the explicit international legal recommendations to adopt such an approach, and a series of recent policy initiatives relating to curtailed protection for children which place them at risk of renewed harm. We are particularly concerned by the significant numbers of children who, because of disputes over age determination, end up being detained and denied a child appropriate the time of making an asylum application is, or (if asylum determination procedure. there is no proof) appears to be, under eighteen; is applying for asylum in his or her own right; and has no adult relative or guardian to turn to in this 14.2 Outlining the Protection Deficits and the Way Forward country.” This definition focuses on the fact that the child has travelled alone. This does not adequately cover the situation facing many children who arrive SEEKING ASYLUM ALONE | UNITED KINGDOM 178 We conclude by outlining the protection deficits, and importantly, by collating our specific and concrete recommendations, in the hope that this will be the aspect of our work which is taken up and drives future developments in this important and problematic area of child protection. Chapter 2 Unaccompanied or Separated Children Arriving in the United Kingdom Inconsistent and narrow definition of “unaccompanied child” According to the Home Office definition: “an unaccompanied asylum seeking child is a person who, at or remain in the U.K. and are in need of protection. For instance the definition excludes children who arrive with adults who are not their parents or legal or customary primary caregivers (for example, where they have been trafficked or smuggled into the U.K.). Inconsistency and incompleteness of statistical data Until 2002 the annual statistics collected and published by the Home Office on applications from unaccompanied or separated children were incomplete. Data from local enforcement offices and from postal applications 1 were not collected, which probably led to significant underestimation. Moreover, until 2005, the Home Office did not include age disputed children in its statistics nor did it adjust its Hosted by www.ijjo.org
Page 1 and 2:
Unaccompanied and Separated Childre
Page 3 and 4:
ABOUT THE AUTHORS Jacqueline Bhabha
Page 5 and 6:
Manchester City Council; Sue Fisher
Page 7 and 8:
Contents Chapter 1 | 9 Chapter 5 |
Page 9 and 10:
SEEKING ASYLUM ALONE | UNITED KINGD
Page 11 and 12:
Arriving in the U.K. 6 The Immigrat
Page 13 and 14:
ers often believe that although a p
Page 15 and 16:
fear of certain groups in society t
Page 17 and 18:
that unaccompanied minor children f
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
It then added that “although chil
Page 23 and 24:
2004 it rose to 8.8%. This was at a
Page 25 and 26:
2.3 Countries of Origin Unaccompani
Page 27 and 28:
Recommendations ■ 1. If the U.K.
Page 29 and 30:
There was no comparable age differe
Page 31 and 32:
2.7 Private Fostering Arrangements
Page 33 and 34:
Endnotes 9 Statistics published by
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
unfounded, thus depriving this subs
Page 39 and 40:
Bill in Parliament which would have
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
of someone who might be an unaccomp
Page 45 and 46:
It is clear that the Rules are a po
Page 47 and 48:
subsequently abducted by their form
Page 49 and 50:
“G” was a 16-year-old Christian
Page 51 and 52:
■ 4. Article 4 of the European Co
Page 53 and 54:
17 A multi-agency task force establ
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
of the asylum determination process
Page 59 and 60:
as a group around the claimant laug
Page 61 and 62:
with as being hostile. Nor did they
Page 63 and 64:
purposes. 38 The Immigration and Na
Page 65 and 66:
or local authority social services
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
als from age disputed children deta
Page 71 and 72:
and February 2005 when 75% of those
Page 73 and 74:
accommodation which is separated fr
Page 75 and 76:
e safe to let the child go and live
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
case, that adult is advised to info
Page 81 and 82:
The official justification for thes
Page 83 and 84:
Asylum Support Team has a case load
Page 85 and 86:
days and a second review after thre
Page 87 and 88:
provides access to rehabilitation a
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
who the child must try to relate to
Page 93 and 94:
adult in their life to speak on the
Page 95 and 96:
8.3 Role of a Legal Guardian rights
Page 97 and 98:
asylum application and monitor the
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
do once I got to London. The pictur
Page 103 and 104:
Some social services departments do
Page 105 and 106:
■ 5. The screening interview shou
Page 107 and 108:
eturn to a country requiring servic
Page 109 and 110:
■ 6. The syllabus for the Accredi
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
this research believe that it is no
Page 115 and 116:
A recent White Paper 13 states that
Page 117 and 118:
an important and distinct role to p
Page 119 and 120:
for Determining Refugee Status. 30
Page 121 and 122:
draws on a small number of other re
Page 123 and 124:
■ 3. UNHCR also states that the q
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128: SEEKING ASYLUM ALONE | UNITED KINGD
Page 131 and 132: contact the child via social servic
Page 133 and 134: It is not possible to ascertain the
Page 135 and 136: leave to remain if it was unlikely
Page 139 and 140: “Unaccompanied children are not g
Page 141 and 142: 5 IND. Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking
Page 147 and 148: until they turn 18, whichever is th
Page 151 and 152: “There are some exceptionally goo
Page 153 and 154: could have been allowed. In one of
Page 155 and 156: esisting removal to their countries
Page 157 and 158: ■ 3. The Law Society and the Lega
Page 159 and 160: determinations we analyzed this did
Page 161 and 162: 42 Interview with Laura Brownlees,
Page 165 and 166: should resolve this difficulty. The
Page 167 and 168: A number of legal representatives b
Page 169 and 170: Department at appeals by unaccompan
Page 171 and 172: Basis Upon Which Appeals Were Allow
Page 173 and 174: Basis Upon Which Appeals Were Allow
Page 175 and 176: Recommendations 14 Immigration Rule
Page 177: SEEKING ASYLUM ALONE | UNITED KINGD
Page 181 and 182: As a consequence of these restricti
Page 183 and 184: ■ ■ accommodate unaccompanied o
Page 185 and 186: that the vast majority of referrals
Page 187 and 188: ecause of long waiting lists and be
Page 189 and 190: which would have provided for a leg
Page 191 and 192: screening interview and do not real
Page 193 and 194: ■ 9.9 The interviewer should alwa
Page 195 and 196: excessive delay in reaching a decis
Page 199 and 200: children, or anyone who had been re
Page 201 and 202: appeal. The Asylum Policy Unit has
Page 203 and 204: and adjudicators rarely prevented t
Page 205 and 206: 22 Information provided by Ailish K
Page 207 and 208: A P P E N D I X 1 Glossary of Terms
Page 209 and 210: Bibliography Amnesty International.
Page 211 and 212: Immigration Advisory Service. Submi
Page 213 and 214: FOR MORE INFORMATION PHOTOGRAPHY CR
show all

Hosted by www.ijjo.org

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?