Hosted by www.ijjo.org

and February 2005 when 75% of those referred
another centre before any assessment could take
were male and 25% female. The percentage of females
place. Concern about the numbers of unaccompa-
being age disputed was lower than the percentage
nied or separated children detained increased over
of the total number of unaccompanied or separated
the period of the research and a number of applica-
child asylum seekers who were female, which was 33%
tions for judicial review were lodged challenging the
in 2003 and 2004. No clear reason emerges from the
lawfulness of this detention. As a result the Govern-
data, but the disparity may indicate that the Immi-
ment has announced a change in its policy: 23
gration Service and the Asylum Screening Units were
more likely to doubt the ages of male children or
where an applicant claims to be under 18, they
that there were a disproportionate amount of male
should be accepted as a minor (for detained fast-
children applying for asylum from the countries
track detention purposes) unless:
most likely to be age disputed. It was certainly true
that between November 2003 and September 2004
the data indicated that unaccompanied or separated
children from Afghanistan, India, Moldova, Albania,
Kosovo, China, and Mongolia were most likely to be
age disputed. Between October 2004 and February
2005, the risk of being age disputed was broadly
1 there is credible and clear documentary evidence
they are 18 or over;
2 a full social services assessment, which looked at
the child’s social history, capabilities and past
experiences, is available stating that they are 18
or over; or
uniform across different nationalities.
Concern was expressed about the fact that
between November 2003 and February 2005 there
were 66 age disputed unaccompanied or separated
children who were referred to Cambridgeshire
County Council but were not assessed. This may
have been because they were released after the inter-
3 their appearance very strongly indicates that they
are significantly over 18 and no other credible evidence
exists to the contrary (if there is any room
for doubt as to whether a person is under 18 they
should not be placed in fast-track detention in
reliance on this criterion).
SEEKING ASYLUM ALONE | UNITED KINGDOM
70
vention of the Medical Foundation for the Care of
Victims of Torture as torture victims 22 or moved to
On occasion, age assessments have been undertaken
by social services departments at other removal centres
though the arrangements have been informal,
without a precise time frame or format for the
assessment. Where good working relationships exist
between removal centre staff and local social services
departments, age assessments are carried out
more promptly than otherwise, an arbitrary situation
resulting from the absence of any statutory duty
for immigration staff to liaise with social services. 24
Arguments have frequently occurred between
different social services departments about which
department has the responsibility for accommodating
an unaccompanied or separated child assessed to
be a minor. As a result, the Association of Directors
Hosted by www.ijjo.org