Hosted by www.ijjo.org

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Chapter 14 | Policy and Practice Recommendations Reducing asylum intake vs. reducing human trafficking Despite the Immigration Service’s assertion that it owes a duty of care to unaccompanied or separated children the requirement to “reduce asylum intake” encourages officials to question children adversarially, which detracts from efforts to identify possible victims of trafficking. This contradictory approach is reflected in the 2006 amendments to the Immigration Rules that impose additional requirements for visitors who are under 18. Though the new rules were allegedly brought in to alleviate growing concerns about the number of unaccompanied or separated children trafficked into the U.K., they are responsive to the perception that unaccompanied or separated children are a “problem” and that they are difficult to return to their countries of origin. More research/data needed on child trafficking The Home Office acknowledges that collection of data and research are essential pre-requisites to the successful identification of trafficked children and other children at risk of harm. However, very little research has yet been done into the scale of child trafficking into and through the U.K. Recommendations ■ ■ 4.1 A specialist team should be established at each port of entry to identify and combat child trafficking. 4.2 Immigration officers and staff working within the Immigration and Asylum Directorate should receive training to assist them in identifying unaccompanied or separated children who are being trafficked and in advising children of their entitlement to protection under the Refugee Convention and the European Convention on Human Rights. Immigration personnel should also be trained to recognize the potential impact of any directives or conventions to combat trafficking which the U.K. may subsequently opt into or ratify. ■ ■ ■ 4.3 The Department for Education and Skills should appoint a senior civil servant to coordinate within the department research into, and schemes to combat, trafficking. 4.4 The Department for Education and Skills should establish a national training programme to alert social workers to the incidence of child trafficking for the purposes of sexual, domestic, and labour exploitation and the needs of the children who have been trafficked for these purposes. 4.5 The Department for Education and Skills should provide funding for local authorities to Hosted by www.ijjo.org 181
■ ■ accommodate unaccompanied or separated children who have been trafficked to the U.K. and who are not entitled to protection under the Refugee Convention where it would not be in their best interests to be returned to their countries of origin. 4.6 The Legal Services Commission should work with Anti Slavery International and the Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association to develop training for legal practitioners to enable them to identify children who have been victims of trafficking. 4.7 The U.K. should introduce legislation to provide indefinite leave to remain for unaccompanied or separated children who do not qualify for protection under the Refugee Convention, but whose experience of being trafficked means that it is not in their best interests to expect them to return to their countries of origin. Chapter 5 Age Disputes: A Barrier to Entering a Child Specific Asylum Determination Process Age disputes A significant number of unaccompanied or separated children have been denied access to a child appropriate asylum determination process and to social services accommodation because their age is disputed during the initial screening process. Often this assessment is based on subjective judgements that the child looks like an adult. An erroneous assessment not only deprives the child of an age appropriate asylum determination process but also impunes the child’s credibility, which can negatively impact the chances of being granted asylum. There is anecdotal evidence that age disputed children are more likely to be detained than adults because of doubts about their credibility. 8 SEEKING ASYLUM ALONE | UNITED KINGDOM 182 Children not given the benefit of the doubt The number of unaccompanied or separated children whose ages were disputed increased rapidly between 2001 (11%) and 2004 (37%), despite a clear written policy on how the age of an unaccompanied or separated child was to be assessed. Up until August 2005, immigration officers were advised to treat as adults children whose appearance strongly suggested that they were over 18 years old, until credible documentary evidence or a full age assessment demonstrating the contrary became available. 9 There was little evidence that children were accorded the benefit of the doubt in borderline cases. Documentary evidence of age A significant number of unaccompanied or separated children and legal representatives report a persistent refusal by the Immigration Service and 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:
Page 129 and 130:
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 137 and 138: SEEKING ASYLUM ALONE | UNITED KINGD
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 179 and 180: concern the plethora of evidence of
Page 181: As a consequence of these restricti
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

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?