REFUGEES AND ASYLUM SEEKERS: THE FACTS

The Status of Refugees

The 1951 Geneva Convention on the Status of Refugees is the principle international Law which underpins asylum. It was not intended as a means of primary immigration, for which domestic laws provided. But as European countries, as well as Australia and America, tightened immigration controls, asylum has become a means of obtaining entry to a country in pursuit of a better life and to escape from political danger.

In 1988 Britain received fewer than 4,000 asylum seekers. The acceleration began in 1989, when the total jumped to 11,000, a trend that continued to 50,000 in 1995. Changes to the benefit system saw a decline to under 30,000 but then numbers then increased again.

In 1997 there were 32,000 and by 1999 the total was above 70,000. These statistics DO NOT INCLUDE dependants as, until recently, the Home Office gave figures only for principal applicants. Over the past three years, nearly 300,000 asylum seekers have arrived in Britain. And since 1990 more than 600,000 people have claimed asylum in the UK.

Last year the main countries of origin were: Iraq, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Somalia and Turkey. With the exception of refugees from the former Yugoslavia, these are the same countries that provided the most asylum seekers in 1998.

The Asylum Process

Asylum seekers register at the Immigration and Nationality HQ at Croydon which, it is generally felt, is not as effective as it might be and which, as early ago as January 03 was criticized by the Home Secretary for failures in the administration system despite the instigation of major reforms.

While asylum seekers are in Britain awaiting a decision, they have several options:

· They can look after themselves, but cannot work

· They can stay with friends or relatives and get limited assistance with vouchers.

· They can be can cared for the National Asylum Support Service, which gives housing and other help but no choice over where to live.

All asylum seekers are now issued with an identity card and it is intended that they should all attend an induction center. A hotel in Sittingbourne was intended to be such a center but it now looks that it will not be open in the near future as planned.

The Home Office is looking for other hotels or large empty homes near places where most applications are lodged, such as Heathrow or Croydon, or south London. Those who choose to be supported by the state will be housed in accommodation centers, initially taking 3,000 people every six months. Those who cannot get into centers – none of which have been built – will continue to be dispersed to local authorities.

None of the proposed accommodation centers has yet received planning permission. And on top of this, the Home Office wants a network of secure detention centers to take people awaiting removal from the country.

The Home Secretary has reintroduced the so-called ‘white list’ of countries whose citizens are assumed not to be political refugees because there is no state persecution taking place there. But this does not stop the application being considered: again, under the UN convention, it must be. It merely means that the claim will be ‘fast tracked’ through the system. The applicant is allowed to stay while it is being considered even though everyone knows it will be refused.

One possible option is to allow British Immigration Officers to make instant decisions to deny entry to those who claim asylum but are evidently not political refugees. It is argued that genuine refugees cannot be told from economic migrants and if they have disposed of their papers, or possess forgeries, identification would be impossible. But if they have arrived at Dover they are clearly not fleeing persecution in France or Belgium.

These two countries may not like it if asylum seekers are returned since they would then assume the responsibility of looking after them. But this is an argument for some sort of burden-sharing agreement to prevent some EU countries taking the brunt of applications.

Why Do People Come?

The motivations of many are perfectly laudable: they are looking for a better life and have risked much to achieve it. These are instincts that have inspired migration across the centuries. It is not the fault, for example, of the Romanian Gypsy that Britain offers food and shelter and a decent(?) health system. But this does not make them political refugees, rather they are designated ‘economic migrants.’ They come to Britain because there are established communities from the countries that provide most asylum seekers and many will have a knowledge of English. It is also known that while it is difficult to get into Britain, it is easy to stay. Two events in recent history have encouraged this movement: the fall of the Berlin Wall made travel through Russia and the eastern bloc countries possible once more; and the Schengen agreement among the then 12 EU nations removed the borders in western continental Europe.

The United Nations Convention

The United Nations Convention was intended to cover only pre-1951 refugees was but was extended by a protocol in 1967 to cover all asylum seekers. It requires a signatory state to offer refuge to a person who:

owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for

reasons of race, religion, or nationality, membership

of a particular social group or political opinion, is

outside the country of their nationality

The key provision of the Convention, known as re-foulement means that no one claiming asylum will be returned to a country where they might be persecuted. A second requirement is that proper consideration be given to each claim and that no one will be prosecuted from enteri2ng a country illegally.

Britain has always interpreted this very generously. The courts here maintain that persecution can be carried out by one group people on another. Yet, Germany interprets their obligation differently: the persecution must be carried out by the agents of a state. Before would-be refugees are allowed into Germany, they need to be escaping an obvious crisis e.g. a war, or persecution practiced by the state. So, for example, Gypsies from Romania or Slovakia (both deemed to be ‘safe’ countries) are simply turned away at the borders.

What Has Been Done?

Since asylum numbers began to rise rapidly in the early 1990s there have been three major pieces of legislation:

1. Asylum and Immigration Act 1996

This had three main objectives: to change asylum procedures so as to deal more quickly with what is considered to be ‘bogus’ asylum claims; to combat immigration racketeering; and to restrict the social security and other economic rights previously available. Those who did not apply at port of entry were denied benefits. However, the courts insisted that no one could be left destitute and so it was left to local authorities to pick up the bill for looking after asylum seekers (it is this which is manipulated at local authority level by extreme fascist groups such as the BNP and which has resulted in their obtaining 5 seats on local councils throughout England – a dangerous and ominous development). The Act also established the ‘white list’ of countries deemed to be safe by the then Home Secretary as one sin which, in general, there was nos erious risk of persecution.

2. The Immigration and Asylum Acts 1999

This Act introduced a ‘one stop ‘ appeal system requiring an adjudicator considering an asylum appeal to deal with other appealable matters, such as human rights appeals. Under the slogan ‘firmer, fairer and faster’, it aimed to stop the flow of applicants, ease councils of the financial burden imposed a result of the previous Act and relieve the housing and social pressures in London and the south-east by dispersing asylums seekers around the country. The Act abolished the ‘white list’ but set up a reception center at Oakington, Cambridgeshire to ‘fast track’ asylum seekers from countries such as the Czech Republic and Romania which are not judged oppressive. This Act also replaced cash benefits with vouchers.

3. Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Bill 2002

This scrapped the vouchers which had been introduced in 1999 but which had caused so much anger among Labour activists, especially the trade unions. It also repealed the provision giving asylum seekers the automatic right to a bail hearing conferred in the 1999 Act. It also effectively reinstated the ‘white list’ scrapped in 1999 to allow ‘clearly unfounded’ asylum claims to be dealt with more swiftly. It also proposed setting up accommodation centers.

What Happens Next?

The European Union is trying to draw up a common asylum and immigration policy, though it has so far taken three years without any final decision being made. EU Officials are working on a directive that will make it easier to send asylum seekers home – including to countries considered ‘unsafe’ if part of that country is secure. Refugees would be given temporary protection and be excluded from asylum is they had committed crimes with an allegedly political objective. Other elements of the plan include tighter controls of the EU borders.

Asylum Seekers and Refugees: UK Facts and Figures

UK Asylum	An asylum seeker is anyone arriving in the UK who demonstrates ‘a well-founded fear of persecution because of race, religion, nationality, or membership of a particular political group or political opinion’

Asylum Applications 2001	71,700 principlal applicants (88,300 with dependants). 25,000 applied at port and 46,200 in country i.e. having arrived illegally or as a student or as a visitor and then decided to claim asylum.

Decisions on Initial Applications 2001	118,195

Granted Asylum 2001	10,960 (10%)

Exceptional Leave to Remain	19,510 (17%)

Refused	87,725 (74%)

Removals from UK	9,285

Appeals Outstanding at 2001-2	55,730

Main countries of origin in 2001	Afghanistan 91,901 Iraq 6,805 Somalia 6,500 Sri Lanka 5,545 Turkey 3,740

Main countries to which failed asylum applicants were removed in third quarter of 2001	Federal Republic of Yugoslavia 435 Czech Republic 190 Poland 145 Pakistan 140 Albania 135 India 115 Romania 105

	An applicant needing accommodation will be put in temporary accommodation before being dispersed to other premises around the country. If the applicant needs financial support he/she will get #29.89 a week if aged 18-24 and #37.77. All applicants are eligible for free medical treatment and children are eligible for free education. Applicants are barred from working for six months. On average, it takes 13 months for an asylum seeker to reach the end of the process i.e. appeal is determined. It is claimed that it is taking two months to deal with the initial application and three-and-a-half months for the appeal to be heard. The gap between the two figures is the time between the appeal wait in the Home Office (about seven months) before being sent to the Immigration Appelate Authority for the appeal.

Centres for Asylum Seekers	Oakington Reception Centre, Cambs. is for asylum claims which, upon initial screening, seem straightforward and suitable for processing within 7-10 days. Capacity 400

Detention Centres	Harmondworth, nr. Heathrow, Capacity 550 Tinsley House, nr. Gatwick, Capacity 137 Yarlswood in Beds. Capacity 900 (closed because of riots and fire) Dungavel, Lanrks. Capacity 150 Campsfield House, Ox. Capacity 180 Dover, Kent Capacity 100 (rising to 316) There are also two prisons which hold immigration detainees, including asylum seekers, whom the authorities fear will abscond, Haslar, Hampshire with a capacity of 160 and Lindholme in South Yorkshire capacity 112.

Plans	The Government wants to build three accommodation centers each holding 750

How Refugees Are Treated Throughout the World

UNITED STATES	AUSTRALIA
US law offers asylum to anyone with a credible fear of persecution according to the definition given in the UN Convention. Last year the US received 60,853 asylum applications. Most came from Mexico with 12,675, followed by China with 9,142. In all, only 7,839 people were granted asylum. At any one time some 20,000 asylum applicants are being held in custody, many of them in local jails. About 40% of them just ‘abscond’ and disappear into US as illegal immigrants.	Australia defines an asylum seeker as someone who is afraid to return to their country of origin dues to a well-founded fear of persecution according to the definition of the UN Convention. In 2000-2001 13,733 applicants for refugee or asylum status were accepted. About 4,000 of these were ‘boat people’ and about 1,500 who claimed to refugees arrived by air. Those who apply for asylum in Australia can often face a long and bureaucratic delay.

DENMARK	GERMANY
Early in May 2002, Denmark’s new parliament passed new legislation tightening controls on immigration. The Bill abolishes the concept of de facto refugees, allowing only individual asylum seekers and refugees entitled to protection under international law to live in Denmark. According to the state run Denmark Immigration Service, a total of 12,512 asylum seekers came to Denmark in 2001, mainly from Iraq, Afghanistan, Bosnia and Yugoslavia; 53% were granted asylum, the process taking on average 240 days.	Asylum in given to those who flee their country for political reasons according to the UN Convention. A second group is tolerated because they would face political persecution if they returned to their home countries. A third group is tolerated on humanitarian grounds. Those refugees who are given asylum for political reasons can stay for life. This may change with the new immigration law that has not yet been passed by parliament. In 2001, German authorities received 88,287 applications 12.4% more than 2000); 5,716 applications were accepted for political reasons, 17,003 for political persecution, and 3,383 on humanitarian grounds. According to official figures 55,402 asylum seekers were refused asylum. In 2001, 5,566 asylum seekers came from Iraq (19%); Turkey (12.3%); and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (8.9%)

FRANCE	CANADA
France received 47,291 asylum requests last year, accepting 18% of them on the basis that they fulfilled the terms of the Geneva Convention on Human Rights. The biggest group of asylum seekers were from Turkey, mostly from Turkish Kurdistan, with 5,347 claims, followed by the Republic of Congo, 3,781, China, 2,948, Mali, 2,940, Algeria, 2,933, Mauritania, 2,332 and Sri Lanka, 2000. Claims take between four months and four years to process. During that period claimants have no right to work and receive welfare benefit of about #200.00 a month for a maximum of 12 months.	According to Canadian statistics there were 44,000 refugee claimants in 2001. Canada accepted 13,500 refugees in 2000. The others were either sent back, are in the process of being sent back, or their cases are under appeal. While waiting for a hearing, claimants have the right to work, collect public welfare, receive free education, free hospitalization, and even free language classes. There is a two-year backlog of applicants.

ITALY	SPAIN
The Italian Interior Ministry says that in 2001 there were 10,000 requests for asylum, of which 1,000 have been accepted, 2,000 rejected and others are still under consideration. The Ministry says there is not a big problem with unofficial arrivals, although this is contested by many politicians.	The term ‘asylum’ is little used in Spain, although there is growing concern about immigration. There are roughly 1 million legal immigrants, about half of them from the EU and the res5t largely from Morocco, Latin America and Eastern Europe, and an estimated 150,000 illegals. Last year 13,000 illegal immigrants were deported while, in one of the Government’s periodic amnesties, 120,000 had their status regularized.

REFUGEES AND ASYLUM SEEKERS: THE FACTS

The Status of Refugees

The Asylum Process

According to Canadian statistics there were 44,000 refugee claimants in 2001. Canada accepted 13,500 refugees in 2000. The others were either sent back, are in the process of being sent back, or their cases are under appeal.