Home
Office Inefficiency “Frustrates the Purpose”
of Internal Review
Reports by the Independent Chief Inspector of
Borders and Immigration, David Bolt, now follow
a familiar pattern. Mr Bolt and his team carry
out an inspection of a certain area of Home
Office activity. A report on possible areas of
improvement is drawn up and sent to the
department for publication. Officials sit on the
report for, say, nine months. They eventually
publish the report alongside a list of reasons
why they couldn’t possibly follow many of the
recommendations, terribly sorry. Mr Bolt,
evidently forewarned, issues a caustic press
release rebutting the Home Office response.
This month’s tit for tat concerns the system of
administrative review, an often risible internal
appeal process in which the Home Office marks
its own homework. Mr Bolt’s opening salvo: I
understand that in responding to my reports the
Home Office will always want to accentuate the
positives. But, this can give the appearance of
selective hearing… some of its responses to this
latest report suggest only a qualified
acceptance of the need to be more open and more
adaptable.
Read more: Freemovement, https://is.gd/T61VBb
General Grounds for Refusal: Understanding
Re-Entry Bans
The Home Office can impose entry bans on people
who have previously breached immigration law or
used deception in their applications for leave.
Bans can last one year, two years, five years or
ten years. Generally speaking, and except for
some minor exceptions, the person will not be
allowed to re-enter the UK during the length of
the ban. It sounds straightforward — but the
detailed rules on re-entry bans are very
complex. This post tries to disentangle them.
Re-entry bans: what periods apply when? The
rules relating to entry bans for the majority of
applicants are at paragraphs A320 and 320(7B) of
the Immigration Rules. For visit visa
applications, see paragraphs V3.7, V3.9 and
V3.10. Paragraph 320(7B) says that entry
clearance or leave to enter the United Kingdom
is to be refused:
Read more: Freemovement, https://is.gd/Lo1dau
Home
Office Issue Woman With British Passport
After 18 Year Battle
Even by Home Office standards, the decision to
defend the case of R (Nmai) v Secretary of State
for the Home Department [2020] EWHC 1139 (Admin)
looks particularly pointless. The claimant had
an incredibly strong case and the judge allowed
the claim with little hesitation. By allowing it
to get to a final hearing the Home Office wasted
the time and resources of everyone involved. The
case was about the department’s longstanding
refusal to issue the claimant with a British
passport. Since 2002, officials had denied the
identity of the claimant and refused to accept
that she has British nationality. There was no
question at any stage that the claimant’s
brother is a British citizen and that he had a
sister, Wendy Nmai, who would also be entitled
to British citizenship.
The sole question therefore was whether the
claimant was Wendy Nmai or not. The claimant
sent the Home Office medical evidence based on
genetic analysis in 2005 which proved beyond
doubt that she and her brother are siblings.
This was confirmed with further DNA testing in
2019 (“the likelihood of their full siblingship
was 99.999995%”). The Home Office response on
both occasions was that this did not prove her
nationality, just that she was the sibling of a
British national. The decision-maker failed to
acknowledge that, once it was accepted that she
was the sibling of her brother, the only logical
conclusion could be that she was Wendy and
therefore a British citizen.
Read more: Freemovement, https://is.gd/4tKtX8
Appeal
Judges Dismiss Challenge to Home Office
Paying Immigration Detainees £1 an Hour
A challenge to the Home Office’s policy of
paying detainees in immigration detention
centres a fixed pay rate of £1 an hour to work
in detention, has been dismissed by the Court of
Appeal. The Appeal judges found that detainees
were not entitled to the national minimum wage
on the basis that Parliament did not intend
their work to be compensated on its true value.
‘This is a very disappointing decision for our
clients,’ said Phil Armitage of Duncan Lewis
Solicitors who represented the appellant. ‘The
£1 an hour rate of pay for detainees has now
been in place for twelve years with no increase.
Our clients were undertaking key work within the
IRCs, including cleaning to ensure the centre
was hygienic, and all they are asking is that
the value of that work is respected by the Home
Office.’
The detainees also argued that work undertaken
by prisoners and detainees were sufficiently
similar, and to not compensate them in the same
way amounts to discrimination. The Court
rejected this argument because they found a
distinction between prisoners and detainees.
According to the judgement, unlike prisoners,
detainees are not required to work and receive a
weekly allowance irrespective of whether they
work. The court was not persuaded by the Home
Office’s argument that the claim was not brought
in time. Typically, Judicial Review should be
brought within three months from when the claim
first arises. The Home Office’s policy was
introduced in 2013. However, the Court ruled
that the timing for a claim first arises ‘when a
person is affected by the application of the
challenge policy or practice’. The decision
reinforces an important principle on timing
grounds. Duncan Lewis Solicitors confirm that
they are considering an appeal to the Supreme
Court.
Source: Ayesha Ahmad, Justice Gap, https://is.gd/UTuieO
Lockdown
Gives Asylum Seekers Reprieve and Hope For
Change in Policy
As Britain takes its first small steps out of
lockdown, there is one group of people quietly
wishing that it wouldn’t. For many asylum
seekers, the two-month hiatus has meant
reprieve. Freed from detention centres,
liberated from the threat of imminent
deportation and no longer obliged to report to
the Home Office, many have welcomed the relief.
And all this at a time when the general
population have learned something of what it is
like to live with severe curbs on civil
liberties. “I know it sounds bad to say, but I
felt like coronavirus should not go,” says
Maimuna Jawo, a Gambian asylum seeker and female
genital mutilation campaigner who had to report
to the Home Office once a month before March.
“My fear now is that normal life will resume and
I’ll have to start reporting again.” Before
lockdown, Jawo was under orders to report to
Eaton House immigration enforcement centre in
Hounslow, west London, on the first Wednesday of
every month. The preceding nights were always
sleepless. “I don’t know what will happen
tomorrow. Maybe they might deport me. Maybe they
might put me back in detention,” she says.
“You’re going to face somebody who you know can
harm you. It’s like there’s a rope around your
neck; every time you go to sign the rope is
pulled.”
Read more: Clare Considine, Guardian, https://is.gd/5zOITh
Home
Office’s Policy On Fee Waivers Is Unlawful
A court ruling has given hope to thousands of
migrants, including health and care workers,
that they will no longer have to pay visa and
NHS surcharge fees if they cannot afford them.
An immigration court found that the Home Office
was applying too harsh a test on whether people
should be forced to pay. It comes as Boris
Johnson faces growing pressure to scrap the
health surcharge for migrant health and social
care workers in light of their essential role
during the coronavirus crisis. Although the Home
Office has granted a free one-year extension to
visas for migrant health and social care workers
– a move estimated to benefit 3,000 workers –
they will be expected to resume payments
thereafter.
The ruling on Wednesday in the upper tribunal of
the immigration and asylum chamber focused on
the issue of fee waivers for visa applications.
The NHS surcharge forms part of this
application. Under Home Office rules, a fee
waiver is possible if applicants can prove they
are destitute. But many impoverished migrants
fall short of the high bar for that status. The
court ruled that the Home Office was applying
the wrong test for whether or not people should
have to pay thousands of pounds for their visas
and NHS surcharge. Instead of the destitution
test, the court said the Home Office should be
applying a test of whether applicants could
afford to pay the fees, and if migrants could
prove they did not have the income to pay then
they should not have to do so.
Read more: Diane Taylorl Guardian, https://is.gd/uY1DS9
|
Removals
by Charter Flight Fall But Violence Stalks
Those Carried Out
Last year saw a “significant reduction”
in charter flights to remove migrants from the
UK, a watchdog reported this week — but those so
removed are still physically restrained more
often than is necessary. In the latter respect,
the 2019 annual report of the Independent
Monitoring Boards Charter Flight Monitoring Team
is similar to last year’s (Too many migrants
still physically restrained on charter flights,
watchdog warns). But its conclusions have become
more critical: 2018’s “Returnees were generally
treated fairly” has become “Some returnees were
treated fairly” in 2019, while a similar
qualifier appears in answer to “Are returnees
treated humanely?”.
The report’s specific recommendations reflect
some real affronts to human dignity: No returnee
should be presented to the escorts for removal
while semi-naked:No returnee who has just
self-harmed should be presented to the escorts
before receiving medical attention. Over half
the 100 people being removed on the charter
flights observed were under some form of
restraint. In fairness to the staff involved in
removals, some went to “extreme lengths” to
resist. The monitors judged that the use of
restraints was “reasonable, necessary and
proportionate in many, but not all, instances…
calm attempts to de-escalate were not deployed”.
Read more: Freemovement, https://is.gd/09Dq9x
Coronavirus and
the UK Immigration System
Measures taken to combat the spread of
coronavirus and COVID-19 disease have changed
almost every aspect of society both here in the
UK and around the world. The immigration system
is no exception. This post gathers together
various updates on changes to immigration law
and practice caused by coronavirus. For now, in
contrast with our normal practice, we’ll be
keeping this post continually up to date rather
than covering new coronavirus developments as
separate blog posts that may become rapidly out
of date. Use the page contents to navigate.
Material that has been added or updated from one
version of this post to the next is labelled New
or Updated.
The situation is particularly pressing for
people who are in the UK on an expiring visa and
unable to leave because of travel restrictions.
The Home Office previously granted visa
extensions on request to those with leave
expiring after 24 January 2020 and before 31 May
2020 who could not leave the UK due to
coronavirus. Note that a request had to be made
(see below on how to do so) so this was not
automatic (unlike for certain NHS staff, see
below). On 22 May the Home Office announced that
those with visas already extended would
automatically have them extended further. There
is no need for this group of people to take any
action. Those who have not already asked for an
extension will need to make a request for the
extension to apply to them.
Read more: Freemovement, https://is.gd/52Wqe9
Immigration Statistics Year Ending March 2020
Forced Returns
In the year ending March 2020, enforced returns
from the UK decreased to 6,778, 21% lower than
the previous year and the lowest number since
records began in 2004. The fall was largely
accounted for by the fall in enforced returns of
people who were in detention prior to their
return (down 19% to 4,644). Over the same
period, there were 10,421 voluntary departures.
Although these data are not directly comparable
over time (as voluntary returns are subject to
upward revision, as in some cases it can take
time to identify people who have left the UK
without informing the Home Office) the numbers
recorded have fallen since 2015.
Immigration Detention
The number of people entering detention in the
year ending March 2020 was 23,075, 5% less than
the previous year. This continues a general
downward trend since 2015. The majority (84%) of
those entering detention in year ending March
2020 were non-EU nationals. The number of non-EU
nationals entering detention fell from a peak of
29,424 in the year ending September 2015 to
19,330 in the year ending March 2020. The number
of EU nationals entering detention gradually
increased between 2009 and 2017. However,
numbers have since fallen to 3,745, falling 21%
between 2017 and 2018 and a further 4% between
year ending March 2019 and year ending March
2020.
Albanians were the most common nationality
entering detention in the latest year,
accounting for 15% of the total (3,398) and a
16% increase on the previous year. The number of
Iranian nationals entering detention more than
doubled to 1,826, moving from the 9th to 2nd
highest nationality entering immigration
detention. These changes have occurred at a time
when the UK has also seen increasing numbers of
asylum applications from both nationalities. As
at 31 March 2020, there were 895 people in
immigration detention, down from 1,637 at the
end of December 2019, and less than half the
number as at 31 March 2019 (1,839).
Asylum, Resettlement and Protection
The UK offered protection – in the form of
asylum, humanitarian protection, alternative
forms of leave and resettlement – to 20,339
people in the year ending March 2020, 17% higher
than the previous year and similar to levels
seen in 2003. The Vulnerable Person Resettlement
Scheme (VPRS) accounted for over three-quarters
(4,030) of those resettled in the UK in year
ending March 2020. 19,768 refugees have been
resettled since the government announced the
target of resettling 20,000 refugees under the
scheme.
There were 35,099 asylum applications (main
applicants only) in the UK in the year ending
March 2020, 11% more than the previous year, but
lower than the recent peak in the year ending
June 2016 (36,546). In the year ending March
2020, 54% of initial decisions on asylum
applications were grants of asylum, humanitarian
protection or alternative forms of leave (such
as discretionary leave or UASC leave). This was
the highest initial decision grant rate on
record, up from 39% in the previous year.
Extension of Temporary Stay in the UK
There were 367,827 decisions on applications to
extend a person’s stay in the UK in the year
ending March 2020, 32% more than in the previous
year. The largest contribution to this increase
was from extensions to leave provided to Chinese
nationals who were unable to return home due to
coronavirus restrictions.
Settlement
There were 95,120 decisions on applications for
settlement in the UK from non-EEA nationals in
the year ending March 2020, a 2% increase on the
year ending March 2019. Of these, 92,031 (97%)
resulted in a grant.
UK Families
There were 194,746 visas and permits granted for
family reasons in the year ending March 2020,
21% more than the year ending March 2019. There
were increases in family-related visas granted
(up 19% to 56,908) and dependants of people
coming to the UK on other types of visas (up 17%
to 85,536). There were also 40,232 EEA Family
permits granted, and 12,070 EU Settlement Scheme
(EUSS) family permits granted since the scheme
was launched on 30 March 2019.
EEA Nationals and Their Family Members
In the year ending March 2020, there were 44,956
registration certificates issued to EEA
nationals and registration cards issued to
non-EEA family members, down 53% on the previous
year. There were 28,402 documents certifying
permanent residence and permanent residence
cards issued in the year ending March 2020, 71%
fewer than the previous year.
Citizenship
There were 165,693 applications for British
citizenship in the year to March 2020, 6% fewer
than the previous year. Applications for
citizenship by EU nationals fell by 20% compared
to the previous year to 44,078. Applications
made by non-EU nationals increased by 1% in the
year ending March 2020 to 121,615.
How Many People Come to the UK Each Year
(Including Visitors)?
There were an estimated 140.9 million passenger
arrivals in the year ending March 2020
(including returning UK residents), a 2% (3.4
million) decrease compared with the previous
year. There were 3.1 million visas granted in
the year ending March 2020, a 5% increase
compared with the previous year, continuing the
upward trend seen over the last decade. Of
these, three-quarters (75%) were to visit, 10%
were to study (excluding Short-term study), 6%
were to work, 2% were for family, and 7% for
other reasons.
[‘These Immigration statistics, year ending
March 2020’ provide the latest figures on
persons who are subject to United Kingdom (UK)
immigration controls. All data in this release
relate to the year ending March 2020 (1 April
2019 to 31 March 2020) and all comparisons are
with the year ending March 2019 (1 April 2018 to
31 March 2019), unless stated otherwise. Due to
European Union (EU) freedom of movement
principles, the majority of UK immigration
controls relate to non-European Economic Area
(EEA) nationals. Unless otherwise stated, data
in this release relate to non-EEA nationals.] |