Stop the Immigration Bill 2013 - 2014

Protest Tuesday 22 October 10:30 am

College Green
Opposite House of Commons
London, SW1A 0AA
(Nearest Tube Westminster )

Stop The Creation Of A Two-Tier Britain

Defend Migrants' Social And Legal Rights

The Immigration Bill being forced through Parliament has been described by one MP as 'the most racist piece of legislation I have seen' in his 16 years as an MP.

Britain's diversity is a real strength, migrants have played an invaluable part in making the UK a fantastic place to live. The contribution made by immigrants in the UK has been enormous economically, socially and culturally. Migrants don't come here to use the NHS, they come here to work in the NHS!

The Bill proposes:
- Landlords verify Immigration status of prospective tenants or face fines of £3000. Understanding immigration status is complex. This will lead to racial profiling and discrimination as already evidenced in some parts of the country.

- A complete shrinking of appeal rights and an increase in appeals that can only be made from abroad. Home Office decision making is poor and round 40% of appeals succeed. Taking away the right to appeal will make the system more unfair seriously impacting on people's rights.

- A charge on ALL migrants without indefinite leave to remain (no matter how much tax they contribute) changing the definition of 'ordinarily resident' in the UK for use of the NHS. This idea is based on the myth of health tourism. It will serve to further dissuade students, qualified workers and performers from overseas coming to the UK.

The Bill itself is a part of the Government's declared intention to make the UK a 'hostile environment' for irregular migrants. It won't stop desperate people coming to the UK nor will make those already here leave but it will push irregular migrants further underground and it will increase distrust of all migrants and ethnic minorities.

The only people who should find the UK a hostile environment are those who seek to promote racism and division in the pursuit of anti-immigrant votes and short term popularity.

Check http://movagxen.wordpress.com/ for more info.

The Movement Against Xenophobia is a coalition of more than 60 organisations committed to opposing the constant anti-immigrant, anti-immigration policies and rhetoric coming from the Coalition Government, the populist media and organisations such as Migration Watch.

From: Guy Taylor <guy.taylor@jcwi.org.uk>

UK: Rights to Freedom of Peaceful Assembly And Association

Mission to the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland by Maina Kiai, UN  Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association. Official visit to the United Kingdom from 14 to 23 January 2013 to assess the situation of freedoms of peaceful assembly and association in the country.

Conclusion and recommendations
A. Conclusion
91. The Special Rapporteur reiterates the utmost importance of the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association in a democratic society. This is all the more important as the United Kingdom, like much of the world, is going through some serious economic challenges that will undoubtedly cause dislocation and discontent. It is in such difficult times, with angry and frustrated citizens, that the respect for such rights must be at its highest.

92. The Special Rapporteur further stresses the importance of maintaining a culture of learning and improving by systematically using a human rights-based approach in all areas pertaining to the rights of freedom of peaceful assembly and of association. He is confident that the Government will see the following recommendations as an opportunity to consolidate the improvements made over the years in relation to the realization of these rights in the country. This would no doubt have a deep resonance at the international level, and influence other countries positively.

B. Recommendations

Right to freedom of peaceful assembly - England and Wales

93. The Special Rapporteur calls on the competent authorities to:

• Adopt a positive law on the right to freedom of peaceful assembly whose purpose is to facilitate and protect such right, in full consultation with civil society and other relevant stakeholders;

• Undertake a judge-led public enquiry into the Mark Kennedy case, and other related cases, with a view to giving a voice to victims, especially women, who had been deliberately deceived by their own government, and paving the way for reparations;

• Review legislation governing undercover policing specifying that peaceful protest groups should not be infiltrated;

Adopt a law on intelligence gathering with a view to increasing the accountability of intelligence services;

• Delete any records on peaceful protestors on the National Domestic Extremism Database and other intelligence databases;

• Adopt a tighter definition of "domestic extremism" and instruct police officers that peaceful protestors should not be categorized as domestic extremists;

• End the practice of containment or "kettling";

• Ensure that law enforcement authorities which violate the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly are held personally and fully accountable for such violations by an independent and democratic oversight body, and by the courts of law; in this regard, command responsibility must be upheld;

• Law enforcement officers should wear identification badges at all times;

• Stop using pre-emptive measures targeted at peaceful protestors;

• Stop using stop-and-search powers in the context of peaceful protests;

• Stop imposing stringent bail conditions on peaceful protestors;

• Establish a protest ombudsman before whom protestors can challenge bail conditions;

• Stop enforcing private injunctions against peaceful protestors;

• Separate the protest liaison function from intelligence gathering;

• Always allow independent monitoring during peaceful protests and assemblies and ensure at all times the protection of those monitoring and reporting on violations and abuses in this context;

• Grant more powers to the Independent Police Complaints Commission, notably by allowing the Commission to report before Parliament, and increasing its resources; protestors should be able to bring complaints directly to the Commission; and a greater degree of diversity among the investigators should be achieved;
94. Private companies should not request private injunctions against peaceful protestors.

Northern Ireland
95. The Special Rapporteur calls on the competent authorities to:

• Ensure that the Parades Commission provides better and clearer reasons for its decisions, to enable the rationale for these to be understood, as well as making additional efforts at outreach and dialogue with the political classes;

• E nsu re that in the Parade Commission's procedures and guidance publications it is made clear that the primary responsibility for maintaining peace during a parade lies with law enforcement officials and not parade organizers;

• Ensure that blatant and provocative violations of the Parade Commission's determinations are prosecuted;

• Ensu re that PS N I actions are not only even-handed in terms of their management of law enforcement during parades and protests, but that they are seen to be even-handed;

• Stop using Attenuating Energy Projectiles (plastic bullets);

• Ensure that PSNls devise and fully implement training and policies aimed at preventing discriminatory practice on ground of gender.

96. The Special Rapporteur calls for political resolution of the issues - such as parades, flags and emblems - that still make the enjoyment of freedom of peaceful assembly problematic in Northern Ireland.

97. The Special Rapporteur calls on civil society organizations to continue facilitating dialogue between communities.

Scotland
98. The Special Rapporteur calls on the competent authorities to:

• Amend the Police, Public Order and Criminal Justice (Scotland) Act 2006 with a view to reducing the notification period to a few days;

• Ensure that the exercise of the right to freedom of peaceful assembly is not subject to cost recovery measures

• Adopt a harmonized approach across local authorities to facilitating parades.

Right to freedom of association

99. In relation to the right to freedom of association, the Special Rapporteur calls on the authorities to:

• Ensure that measures taken by the State or by third parties in the context of counter-terrorism meet international human rights standards, in particular the principle of non-discrimination;

• Amend labour laws to establish a right not to be blacklisted, and to provide redress for those who have been victims of this practice;

• Ensure that the law also protects the right to strike, including secondary strikes in conformity with international human rights law.

You can download the full report <http://www.refworld.org/docid/525fab2a4.html>here . . . .

Immigration Bill  2013 -2014

Presentation and First Reading (Standing Order No. 57)

Explanatory notes to the Immigration Bill

These explanatory notes relate to the Immigration Bill as introduced in the House of Commons on 10th October 2013. They have been prepared by the Home Office in order to assist the reader of the Bill and to help inform debate on it. These explanatory notes do not form part of the Bill and have not been endorsed by Parliament.

The notes need to be read in conjunction with the Bill. They are not, and are not meant to be, a comprehensive description of the Bill. So where a clause or part of a clause does not seem to require any explanation or comment, none is given the Bill is in 7 parts.

Part 1 of the Bill, and Schedules 1 and 2, contain powers to enable the removal of persons unlawfully in the United Kingdom ("the UK"), enforcement powers, restrictions on bail and additional powers to take biometrics.

Part 2 amends rights of appeal, limiting immigration appeals to circumstances where there has been a refusal of a human rights or asylum or humanitarian protection claim, or where refugee status or humanitarian protection has been revoked. It also provides a power for the Secretary of State to certify that to require an appellant who is a foreign criminal to leave the UK before their appeal is determined would not cause serious irreversible harm, in which case the person may only appeal from outside the UK. It also provides that a court or tribunal considering a claim that a decision is unlawful on the grounds that it would breach a person's right to respect for private and family life under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights ("the ECHR") must, in particular, have regard to the public interest and sets out what the public interest requires.

Part 3, and Schedule 3, covers new powers to regulate migrants' access to services. In general, landlords will be liable to a civil penalty if they rent out premises to migrants who are not lawfully present in the UK. Migrants with time limited immigration status, such as certain categories of workers and students, can be required to make a contribution to the National Health Service ("the NHS") via a charge payable when applying for entry clearance or an extension of their leave to remain. Banks will be required to undertake an immigration status check before opening a current account and will be prohibited from opening new accounts for those who are known to be unlawfully in the UK and who are disqualified from opening an account, and those unlawfully here will be unable to obtain or retain a driving licence. Provision is also made for the enforcement of civil penalties against employers of persons without a right to work in the UK.

Part 4, and Schedules 4 and 5, contain new powers to investigate suspected sham marriages and civil partnerships and extend powers for information to be shared by, and with, registration officials. Notices of marriage or civil partnership involving a non-EEA national (without settled status or an EU law right of permanent residence and not exempt from immigration control or holding a marriage or civil partnership visa) will be referred to the Home Office for a decision whether to investigate whether the proposed marriage or civil partnership is a sham.

Part 5, and Schedule 6, strengthen the powers of the Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner ("OISC") and simplify the regulatory scheme for the immigration advice sector.

Part 6, and Schedule 7, provide for the Secretary of State to enable third parties, including carriers and port operator staff, (as 'designated persons'), to undertake embarkation checks on passengers departing from the UK. They also contain powers to direct carriers and port operators to make arrangements for a designated person to conduct embarkation checks. Part 6 also makes provision for fees to be charged for immigration applications and other functions.

Part 7 contains general provisions, including a power, by order, to make minor and consequential amendments to other enactments, general provisions about commencement and extent and provisions in respect of the parliamentary procedure to be applied to orders and regulations made under the Bill.

Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time tomorrow, and to be printed (Bill 110) with explanatory notes (Bill 110-EN).
<>House of Commons / 10 Oct 2013 : Column 317

Immigration Bill Explanatory Notes Download <>here . . . .

Immigration Bill 2013 -2014 Download <> here . . . .

UKBA: Immigration 'Go Home' Texts Prompt Complaints

Officials have sent messages to almost 40,000 people they suspect of not having a right to be in the UK.

Home Office texts wrongly accusing people of being illegal immigrants have prompted more than 140 complaints. Among those contacted was a veteran civil rights campaigner who has lived in Britain since 1966.

Mark Harper, the immigration minister, defended texting people urging them to contact border officials to discuss their immigration status.

"We believe it is right to enforce the rules," the Home Office said.

"We are taking proactive steps to contact individuals who records show have no valid right to be in the UK."

It said only 14 people had been contacted in error. But two of them - campaigner Suresh Grover and immigration lawyer Bobby Chan - reacted angrily to the messages.
Read more: BBC News, <>18 October 2013

Protest At Paris Schools Over Immigrant Expulsions

Hundreds of French teenagers erected barricades outside their schools and marched through Paris on Thursday to protest the police expulsions of immigrant families — including some of their classmates.

A few students clashed with police firing tear gas but most marched peacefully, some climbing on bus shelters to shout demands for the interior minister's resignation.

Anger erupted this week over the treatment of a 15-year-old Kosovar girl who was detained in front of classmates on a field trip. The government says her eight-member family had been denied asylum and was no longer allowed to stay in France.

Such expulsions occur regularly around France as the government tries to limit illegal immigration. But the treatment of the girl touched a nerve, with critics saying police went too far and betrayed France's image as a champion of human rights.
Read more <> here . . . .

Lord Neuberger - Justice In An Age Of Austerity

I detect two real problems in relation to justice. Both those problems may be summarised in one word, accessibility: accessibility to the law and accessibility to the courts.

Cutting the cost of legal aid deprives the very people who most need the protection of the courts of the ability to get legal advice and representation.

The courts have no more important function than that of protecting citizens from the abuses and excesses of the executive - central government, local government, or other public bodies.

The more power that a government has, the more likely it is that there will be abuses and excesses which result in injustice to citizens

It is when one turns to the eighth and last factor, affordability, that serious problems arise. This is attributable to two reasons: first, legal advice and representation cost a lot more than most people can afford, and, secondly, the Government is increasingly reluctant to pay what the legal profession charges.

Read the full text of the speech here . . . .

Garden Court Chambers - Immigration Law Bulletin - Issue 344

Humiliating Defeat For Theresa May In Supreme Court Appeal

Home Secretary, Theresa May, lost her landmark Supreme Court appeal today in the case of a former Iraqi refugee granted British nationality and who was later stripped of his citizenship which he said left him stateless.

The decision paves the way for Hilal Abdul Razzaq Ali Al-Jedda, who was once held as a terrorist suspect, to return to the UK from Turkey where he currently lives with his family. In a humiliating verdict the five justices said that if Mrs May's had paid more attention to her own guidance she would have realised the "fallacy" of her appeal.

It is the first case on the issue of deprivation of nationality to reach the Supreme Court and legal experts believe it will be important in the context of the prevention of statelessness.
Read more: Paul Gallagher, <> Indpendent, 10/10/13

Deportation of Foreign Criminals

New immigration rules are a "Complete code"

In what circumstances can a foreign criminal resist deportation on the basis of his right to family life under Article 8 of the Convention? Until 2012 this question was governed entirely by judge-made case law. Then rules 398, 399 and 399A were introduced into the Immigration Rules HC 395.

The rules introduced for the first time a set of criteria by reference to which the impact of Article 8 in criminal deportation cases was to be assessed. The intention of the legislature in introducing these rules was to state how the balance should be struck between the public interest and the individual right to family life:

a decision taken in accordance with the Rules will, other than in exceptional cases, [is] compatible with Article 8.

…the new Rules reflect the Government's view - which Parliament will be invited to endorse - of how the balance should be struck between individual rights under A8 and the public interests in safeguarding the UK's economic well-being in controlling immigration and in protecting the public from foreign criminals. (Home Office Statement, 13 June 2012)

In the context of deportation of foreign criminals, the new rules set out thresholds of criminality (by reference to length of terms of imprisonment) so that the Article 8 private life claims brought by foreign criminals can only succeed if they not only have certain periods of residence but can also show their criminality has fallen below these thresholds - unless there are "exceptional circumstances".

This appeal raises important questions as to the proper interpretation of the new rules, and in particular, how these "exceptional circumstances" may be assessed.
Read more: Rosalind English, <> UK Human Rights Blog, 09/10/13

Martha Storey Nkhoma - Back in Nottingham Where She Belongs
The Good news is that Martha is home on bail. She will now have access to such essentials as adequate prescribed medicine as well as sleep and friends, familiar places and open access to sky. Faiths in Action will be organising a fundraising event to help with Martha's appeal and to share her story. In the meantime celebrate with us, where-ever and who-ever you are. With your help and support and with the dedicated work of her new solicitor, Martha is, for now at least, where she needs and deserves to be.
Many thanks to all who signed the petition

<> 'Faiths in Action Nottingham'

Budrevich v. the Czech Republic
(no. 65303/10) - Violation Article 13 in conjunction with Article 3
The applicant, Andrei Budrevich, is a Belarusian national who was born in 1979. The case concerned Mr Budrevich's removal to Belarus. In 2006 he left Belarus and entered the Czech Republic, where he applied for asylum, stating that he feared imprisonment in Belarus because he had imported advertisements in support of an opposition candidate in the presidential elections. His request was rejected as the authorities considered his allegations contradictory and not credible. Three subsequent requests for asylum were also rejected. Following his conviction of a number of offences, a court sentenced him to expulsion from the territory of the Czech Republic in March 2009.

However, the execution of the sentence was stayed in accordance with an interim measure applied by the European Court of Human Rights (under Rule 39 of its Rules of Court) in November 2010, indicating to the Czech Government not to remove Mr Budrevich to Belarus until further notice. In 2011, the Czech authorities granted Mr Budrevich subsidiary protection under the Asylum Act, which was extended in 2013. Relying on Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy), he complained that his removal to Belarus would expose him to a real risk of ill-treatment and that he had not had an effective remedy in the Czech Republic against his removal.

Yarl's Wood Immigration Removal Centre

Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) if she will ensure that any reports into allegations of sexual assault at Yarl's Wood immigration removal centre that have previously been or will in the future be produced by Serco are made available to the public; [170514]

(2) if her Department will investigate allegations of sexual assault at Yarl's Wood immigration removal centre; [170515]

(3) what procedures are in place to (a) ensure women detained for immigration purposes are protected from sexual assault and harassment and (b) facilitate immigration detainees to report incidences of sexual assault and harassment on the immigration detention estate; [170516]

(4) what assessment she has made of the suitability of detaining women for immigration purposes following the allegations of sexual assault at Yarl's Wood immigration removal centre. [170517]

Mr Harper: Detention plays a key role in the maintenance of an effective immigration control. We are committed to ensuring that ail detained persons are held safely and that they are treated with dignity and respect. This applies equally to women and men. The allegations relating to Yarl's Wood do not alter that position.

Bedfordshire police are investigating the allegations that have been made and Home Office Immigration Enforcement is offering full assistance to that investigation. Detainee custody officers working in immigration removal centres (IRC) undergo thorough security checks and complete extensive training before they are certificated to work with detainees. There are strict rules governing interaction with detainees. Any member of staff who contravenes any of the rules governing interaction, whether inside or outside centres, will face disciplinary action, which may lead to dismissal. The use of CCTV cameras in the majority of public areas in IRCs and in all vans used for escorting detainees provides an additional safeguard.

A formal complaints system operates in all IRCs and all detainees are advised how to complain. Detainees may complain in confidence to members of the Independent Monitoring Board appointed at each centre. In addition, detainees have access to mobile phones and the internet and are therefore able to contact the police direct to report an allegation of sexual assault or harassment.

All serious misconduct allegations are passed by the Professional Standards Unit of the Home Office to the appropriate authorities, such as the police or other oversight bodies, where appropriate. The police will take forward their own investigations separately to but in parallel with Home Office internal inquiries. Detainees who are not satisfied with the way in which their complaint has been handled may ask for it to be reviewed by the independent prisons and probation ombudsman.

Reports relating to allegations made by individuals contain personal information and are not published in order to comply with the requirements of the Data Protection Act 1998.
<> House of Commons / 15 Oct 2013 : Column 654W