Skip to content
Donate

Category: News

Medical Justice Annual Report 2021/22

1st February 2021 – 31st January 2022

Download the Annual Report

 

“I am really excited and honoured to have been appointed vice chair of Medical Justice and to be a part of this great team that is literally saving and transforming lives in immigration detention. I look forward to using my skills and experience to increase the visibility of the great work we do and to offer strategic direction that reflects the needs of our detained clients.

I commend Medical Justice for having the foresight and vision to include people with lived experiences in their board of trustees, as I believe this is vital to the success, relevance and sustainability of Medical Justice. As a beneficiary of this policy, it has been great to use my lived experience of detention.”

Bridget Banda – Vice-Chair

 

Some topics covered in this annual report ;

  • Acting as a Core Participant in the Brook House Inquiry – The Inquiry’s clinical expert accepted a causal link between the failure to identify and release highly vulnerable individuals leading to their mistreatment.
  • The All-Party Parliamentary Group’s inquiry into quasi-detention – “What we have heard so far is incredibly worrying. None of this cruelty is happening by accident.” Alison Thewliss MP, APPG chair
  • Campaigning against the 9 planned Accommodation Centres for 8,000 asylum seekers
  • In spring 2021 we worked with a number of people who were not detained but nevertheless being held at Tinsley House, usually an Immigration Removal Centre. Clare Jennings of Matthew Gold & Co. Solicitors ; “They felt like they were in prison because that’s exactly where they were”.
  • There was a sudden sharp increase in referrals from May 2021 onwards as the Home Office started detaining large numbers of people who arrived in the UK by small boats. The majority were Vietnamese nationals. Many reported histories of trafficking over several months spanning many countries, only interrupted by being intercepted by Border Force while crossing the channel. Of 60 Vietnamese clients, 56 had eventually been released – but, to our great concern, 55 then disappeared, feared re-trafficked, including an age disputed young person, who reported being 15 years old.
  • During the summer of 2021 charter flight operations increased and we saw many people detained for mass deportations on charter flights to countries including Vietnam, Nigeria and Zimbabwe. They included people with serious health problems and many who had lived in the UK for several decades.
  • People detained in prisons under immigration powers (including torture survivors and those with serious vulnerabilities) were locked in their cells for over 22 hours a day, with people sometimes being held in their cells for days at a time. Some self-harmed, attempted suicide and had difficulty sleeping or eating. Some who did not have any previous mental health problems eventually left detention with a mental illness. The government suggests that the use of solitary confinement is a public health response to COVID-19. However, this cannot be justified; prolonged solitary confinement is a practice that has been prohibited internationally by the UN’s ‘Mandela Rules’.

 

We know the Medical Justice model works; assisting individuals and using our medical evidence to secure systemic change. Tens of thousands of people subject to immigration control have benefitted from our policy work and litigation. Meanwhile, the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Immigration Detention, for which Medical Justice provides the secretariat, engages with non-governmental organisations and others with personal experience and expertise, amplifying our collective impact. Medical Justice is increasingly being a force for good way beyond its own direct client base.

An independent evaluation in 2021 noted: those who know Medical Justice “feel it has strong characteristics and a highly respected reputation. It is regarded as principled, expert and evidence- based, tenacious in its casework and policy work, fierce and ferocious when needed and brave in the way it speaks truth to power.”

Thank you to our incredible staff, our volunteers, our funders, our partner organisations, and to our inspirational and brave clients.

 

Download the Annual Report

Theresa Schleicher from Medical Justice gives oral evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee (HASC)

WATCH HERE – 6th July 2022 – 9.45am

Questioned on Rwanda scheme : Medical Justice, Asylum Aid, the Refugee Council, the Institute for Government and ex-Director Generals at the Home Office

The Home Affairs Committee examines the implementation of the Rwanda asylum agreement on Wednesday 6 July when it takes evidence from refugee charities and former heads of UK Border Force and Immigration Enforcement.

Under the agreement with Rwanda, anyone who has entered the UK irregularly since 1 January 2022 will be considered for relocation. Claimants whose asylum applications are rejected will stay in Rwanda or return to their country of origin. Successful asylum applicants will also stay in Rwanda – there is no circumstance where an applicant will be returned to the UK. All individuals on the first scheduled flight were removed before take off following legal action. The Government has stated it will continue to plan future flights.

 

Purpose of session

In this session the Committee will hear from charities supporting refugees identified as being eligible for the Rwanda relocation scheme. It will examine their concerns about the policy and the process for notifying those subject to removal. It will also examine how decisions are appealed and what legal support is available.

The Committee will then take evidence from former Director Generals at UK Border Force and Immigration Enforcement, and an Institute for Government academic, on how immigration policy is, and should be, developed. This will include how the Rwanda policy relates to the UK’s broader refugee strategy and attempts to reach agreement with other nations, particularly in the EU. It will also consider the effectiveness of the Rwanda agreement as a deterrent for people smuggling and the challenge of disrupting criminal gangs.

 

Witnesses

Panel 1

  • Enver Solomon, Executive Director, Refugee Council
  • Theresa Schleicher, Casework Manager, Medical Justice
  • Alison Pickup, Director, Asylum Aid

Panel 2

  • Tony Smith CBE, ex-Director General, UK Border Force
    (10.45am-11.10am)
  • David Wood, ex-Director General, Immigration Enforcement
    (11.10-11.40am)
  • Rhys Clyne, Senior Researcher, Institute for Government
    (10.45am-11.45am)

What next for asylum seekers in the UK? Resisting the Nationality & Borders Act

MSF UK & THE TAKE ACTION GROUP PRESENT

What next for asylum seekers in the UK? Resisting the Nationality & Borders Act

 

Through extraordinarily hard work, refugee advocates and ‘activist lawyers’ managed to stop the first flight to Rwanda taking place. But this is only a temporary reprieve – the government will continue to try to send people overseas. The so called ‘Migration and Economic Development Partnership with Rwanda’ is only the highest profile initiative. The Nationality and Borders Act has brought many more changes to the way asylum seekers and refugees will be treated in the UK.

This online event, presented by MSF UK and The Take Action Group, will host speakers at the forefront of pushing back on these policies and changes to talk about what they are likely to mean in practice, and to reflect on what we can all do to fight for refugee rights.

Thursday 23 June, 19:00 – 20:30

REGISTER HERE

 

Speakers include:

Dr. Liz Clark, Clinical Advisor at Medical Justice, which works to uphold the health and associated legal rights of people in immigration detention and provides medical evidence, so the devastating health harms of detention are understood and acted on.  Medical Justice has been providing medical assessments and care to some of the men in detention served with notices of intent to be removed to Rwanda.  Liz is a GP and has been carrying out clinical assessments and writing medico-legal reports for asylum seekers for over 10 years with Medical Justice and Freedom from Torture. She has also worked as a medical manager for MSF working with survivors of violence, sexual violence and torture in Greece, Lebanon and Egypt.

Clare Moseley, Founder and Head of Care4Calais, supporting migrants and asylum-seekers in Napier Barracks and asylum accommodation. Care4Calais challenged the Government’s proposals to forcibly remove people seeking UK to Rwanda in court, alongside the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) and Detention Action.

Nadine Tunasi is an expert by experience, a leading member of the Survivors Speak OUT network & a Survivor Champion for the FCDO’s Preventing Sexual Violence in Conflict Initiative. She advocates against harmful asylum and immigration policies, fighting for the adoption of positive policies for people navigating the asylum and immigration system.  She has contributed to several research projects including Freedom from Torture’s ‘Beyond Belief’ report which calls for fundamental culture change at the Home Office.  Nadine is also a writer and uses her writing to express the difficulties that asylum seekers and refugees encounter.  One of her poems, ‘My Hands’, was interpreted in music by the distinguished composer Kate Whitley, performed at the Aldeburgh Festival.  Recently, Nadine has been an expert working to develop the ‘stigma toolkit project’ for Synergy for Justice, and as  a survivor legal expert drafting a chapter in ‘Access to Justice: A  Pathway for survivors seeking Justice’.

Duncan Lewis Solicitors is a leading public law team, which has been fearless in holding the government to account, representing a range of organisations in challenging the legality of removals to Rwanda and lack of meaningful access to legal support for women in detention, among other cases.

Please join us for an evening of fascinating discussion during Refugee Week on Thursday 23 June, 19.00 – 20.30 – remember to register here!

 

Torture victims amongst our 26 detained clients still under threat of removal to Rwanda

Medical Justice is indescribably relieved that our clients were taken off the plane to Rwanda last night.

Medical Justice has 26 clients in detention with Notices of Intent to remove to Rwanda. 11 were issued with Removal Directions for yesterday’s fight. Over the last few days, many of these Removal Directions were cancelled. 3 clients were amongst the 7 people taken to the plane for Rwanda. They were all later taken off the flight and taken back to immigration detention.

We are immensely grateful to our outstanding casework team and our dedicated volunteer clinicians who carried out medical assessments for our clients and wrote medico-legal reports which were then used by our clients brilliant legal representatives.

Dr Rachel Bingham of Medical Justice explains to Australia’s ABC News expresses concerns about current mental health and histories of torture of our 26 detained clients still under threat of removal to Rwanda

 

Watch the ABC News clip

 

Listen to the ABC News radio piece

 

APPG Chair criticises Rwanda plan and new asylum centre

The Chair of the APPG on Immigration Detention, Alison Thewliss MP spoke out last week against the Home Secretary’s recent Rwanda asylum deal and plans to open a new asylum accommodation centre in North Yorkshire, modelled on the infamous site at Napier Barracks in Kent.

In a statement issued last week, Ms Thewliss said:

“The plans introduced by the UK government to send asylum seekers to Rwanda from Britain are utterly appalling.

“The UN High Commissioner for Refugees has already condemned these plans on ethical and legal grounds, while senior Home Office officials say there’s no evidence the arrangement will provide value for money. There are serious questions of transparency and how the Home Office can ever be held to account for what happens to the individuals it sends to Rwanda. But this is just another example of the Government abandoning its responsibility to offer sanctuary and support to those fleeing persecution.

“My recent visit to Napier Barracks allowed me to see first-hand how profoundly unsuitable and dehumanising such sites are for asylum seekers. The dilapidated former barracks used by the Government to house asylum seekers are inadequate, lacking in facilities and people there struggle to get access to lawyers and adequate healthcare. It is frightening to imagine what a facility located in another country thousands of miles away from scrutiny will be like.

“I would have hoped that the Tory Government would learn from the comments made after our visit. Yet despite the warnings given to them about the conditions in Napier, the government is proceeding with plans at Linton-on-Ouse. With other members of the APPG, I have repeatedly called for Napier Barracks to close and for the UK government not to open any further similar sites. I reiterate that call today.

“It is time for the government to get a grip and stop with these tactics to divert the attention away from the chaos within this Government. Thousands of human lives are at risk here, they must be protected. During the worst cost of living crisis to date, the Government should be focusing on allowing all people to have enough money to feed themselves, rather than pandering to the dog whistle politics of the far right.”

Ms Thewliss also raised these issues in a Commons debate – describing the Rwanda plan as “despicable”, and Napier as “not fit for purpose”:  “it is cold, bleak and lacking in dignity and privacy, Vulnerable people struggle to get medical, social and legal support”.

You can watch her full contribution in the chamber along with the Home Secretary’s response here, or read the transcript here.

 

Media coverage

Daily Record | 18 Apr 2022
UK’s Rwanda refugee plan is obscene, do not allow this to happen in our name

Report of APPG Members’ visit to Napier Barracks

Read Full Visit Report Here

 

On 7 April 2022, the APPG on Immigration Detention published the report of its Members’ visit to Napier Barracks, which took place in early February this year.

An inquiry undertaken last year by the APPG found that being accommodated at Napier left many people seeking asylum feeling dehumanised and suffering a profound deterioration in their mental health, in some cases to the point of attempting suicide.

The APPG Members visiting in February found that little had changed at the site. They said they remain “deeply concerned” for the individuals accommodated there, calling for Napier to be closed with “immediate and permanent effect”.

A ruling by the High Court in June 2021 found that Napier Barracks did not meet minimum standards for asylum accommodation. The parliamentarians’ report warns that changes introduced by the Home Office after the ruling have failed to address the fundamental problems at the site, with serious concerns continuing in relation to:

  • inadequate safeguarding of vulnerable people, such as victims of torture and trafficking, with little being done to identify residents who are in need of support
  • the physical environment of the site, which was run-down, isolated and bleak, with many buildings in an extremely poor state of repair
  • a near total lack of privacy and private spaces at the site, with residents continuing to be accommodated in dormitories of up to 12-14 people and having to share showers, toilets, and other facilities
  • noise levels in the dormitories, and the sleep deprivation and the negative impact on residents’ mental health resulting from this
  • inadequate access for residents to healthcare and legal advice, and the difficulties they face in engaging with their asylum claim at the site
  • the site’s prison-like nature and military features, including security checks upon entering and the presence of security guards patrolling
  • the lack of autonomy, choice and control over their daily lives that residents experience at the site.

Alison Thewliss MP for Glasgow Central and Chair of the APPG, who took part in the visit, said:

“It was deeply concerning to see how poor the conditions in the Napier Barracks were.

“Residents in the barracks are living in the most dreadful of circumstances, and this must end.

“Many of those living in the barracks have fled conflict and have suffered unimaginable trauma – they should be treated with dignity and respect, and allowed to rebuild their lives.”

The publication of the report came on the same day as a debate on Napier in the House of Lords. The debate was seeking to challenge legislation brought in by the Home Office last year granting itself planning permission to use Napier Barracks until at least 2026.

Lib Dem peer Lord Paddick, who organised the debate, referenced the findings from the APPG’s visit and inquiry in his speech. You can read the full debate transcript here.

 

Media coverage

 

Former residents at the barracks said:

“It would be difficult to design a system that more perfectly delivers despair and deteriorating human health and mental capacity than these ‘asylum camps’

“My initial reaction was shock as I was driven through the barbed-wire-topped gates of an army camp and faced with a black metal firing target of a soldier. … Between us we had fled torture, false imprisonment, war and civil conflict. We now found ourselves inside exactly the sort of institution many of us had already experienced in our home countries and which brought back terrible memories and stirred up traumas.

“There have protestors outside of the camp gates. They shout and set off fireworks. It is terrifying as it sounds like gunfire. … they were there they took photographs and videos of me. I have seen that some videos of residents in the camp have been posted on YouTube … it might put my family in Syria at risk because the government in Syria may then identify me as an asylum seeker.”

– Kenan describing Penally Barracks

 

“Places like Napier barracks do not represent the values of the people of this country. It encourages discrimination, hostility and hate. Vulnerable people have been suffering mentally and physically by staying there. The ones who were moved out from Napier barracks are still dealing with the mental health consequences of it. their rights were harmed and their dignity was disrespected and it all happened while they were present in the country and they had legal support. I cannot imagine how worse it can be if they were processed offshore without anyone to assess and observe”.

– Erfan, describing Napier Barracks

 

APPG press release

Cross-party call by parliamentarians to end dehumanising quasi-detention of people seeking asylum

In the wake of the Channel crossing tragedy, where 27 people lost their lives trying to reach the UK, a cross-party group of parliamentarians has today published a report calling on the government to end its use of Napier Barracks in Kent to accommodate people seeking asylum. The report also recommends the scrapping of government plans for more large-scale accommodation based on Napier as a pilot.

The quasi-detention sites examined in the report replicate many of the features found in detained settings – including visible security measures, surveillance, shared living quarters, lack of privacy, poor access to healthcare, legal advice and means of communication, and isolation from the wider community.

The report is the result of an inquiry by the APPG on Immigration Detention into the use of the sites. Led by a panel of 10 parliamentarians from both government and opposition parties, the APPG Inquiry gathered written and oral evidence from over 30 participants – including people accommodated at the sites and charities working directly with them, medical and legal experts, and on-site contractors.

The report explains how features of the sites – including their prison-like conditions – make them “fundamentally unsuitable” as asylum accommodation. For survivors of torture, trafficking or other serious forms of violence – as many asylum-seekers are – such conditions can cause them to relive past abuses and be highly re-traumatising.

The report also documents serious operational failings by the Home Office and its contractors in their running of the sites. It details how people accommodated at the sites have been subjected to “appalling treatment and conditions” which has left them feeling “dehumanised, exhausted and suffering a profound deterioration in their mental health, in some cases to the point of attempting suicide”.

In August this year, the government extended its use of Napier Barracks until 2025 without consultation. The High Court has now granted permission for a judicial review challenging this decision. The government has also confirmed that Napier may act as a pilot for the new asylum accommodation centres proposed in the Nationality and Borders Bill currently making its way through Parliament.

In its report, the APPG Inquiry Panel makes clear its opposition to these centres. It urges the government instead to ensure that people seeking asylum are housed in decent, safe accommodation in the community that supports their well-being and recovery from trauma, facilitates their engagement with the asylum process, and allows them to build links with their community.

In March this year, the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration & Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons (HMIP) found two of the sites, Napier Barracks and Penally Camp, to be “impoverished, run-down and unsuitable for long-term accommodation”.[1] Similarly, in a high-profile case the High Court ruled in June that Napier Barracks failed to meet minimum standards of accommodation for asylum seekers, and that for a period residents were unlawfully detained there under purported Covid rules.[2]

Evidence submitted to the APPG Inquiry demonstrated that few improvements had been made by the Home Office since these serious concerns were raised.

 

 

Alison Thewliss (right), MP for Glasgow Central and Chair of the APPG on Immigration Detention, commented:

“The report makes for sober reading. It has highlighted the myriad ways in which the Home Office is comprehensively failing some of the most vulnerable people in society. Those forced to stay in quasi-detention accommodation have included children, people who have survived torture or trafficking, and other at-risk groups

“Our worst fears have been confirmed that this type of accommodation is not only inappropriate, but downright harmful.

“The Home Office have presided over a litany of failures- not only are the sites themselves unsuitable, but their running and mismanagement of Napier Barracks and other large scale accommodation units has actively contributed to poor mental and physical health outcomes for residents, with barely existent safeguarding.

“The accounts of witnesses were heart-breaking and painted a picture of misery and a disregard for medical and legal rights. It is even more worrying that the Home Office themselves described this situation as a ‘pilot project’, suggesting this is the beginning of a new approach. Plans for ‘offshoring’ in the Nationalities and Borders Bill being debated this week certainly imply that there is worse to come, and we should not stand for it.

“The Home Office must listen to experts and survivors of this disastrous scheme and put a stop to quasi-detention once and for all.”

 

Notes

  1. For media enquiries, please contact Elspeth Macdonald on contact@appgdetention.org.uk / 07784 034660.
  2. Former residents at Napier and Penally have kindly offered to be interviewed. Please contact Elspeth Macdonald (contact details above) if this is of interest.
  3. The All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Immigration Detention comprises over 40 parliamentarians from across all main political parties who share concerns about the use of immigration detention in the UK. More information about the group, including its full membership list, is available at detention.org.uk.
  4. More information about the inquiry, including links to the written and oral evidence collected, are available at https://appgdetention.org.uk/inquiry-into-quasi-detention/.
  5. The inquiry panel members were:Alison Thewliss MP (SNP) – APPG chair
    Paul Blomfield MP (Labour)
    Wendy Chamberlain MP (Liberal Democrat)
    Mary Foy MP (Labour)
    Richard Fuller MP (Conservative)
    Helen Hayes MP (Labour)
    Anne McLaughlin MP (SNP)
    Bell Ribeiro-Addy MP (Labour)
    Lord Roberts of Llandudno (Liberal Democrat)
    Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Labour)

[1] See: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/an-inspection-of-the-use-of-contingency-asylum-accommodation-key-findings-from-site-visits-to-penally-camp-and-napier-barracks

[2] See: R (NB & Ors) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWHC 1489 (Admin)

Harmed Not Heard – Report Released

Failures in safeguarding for the most vulnerable people in immigration detention

Read Full Report here

 

The Medical Justice “Harmed Not Heard” report evidences that the Home Office process to identify and release highly vulnerable people in immigration detention is totally and utterly flawed.

The report analyses Medical Justice clinical assessments carried out between July and December 2021 for 45 clients detained in various immigration removal centres (IRCs) across the UK. These clients’ histories included severe trauma, significant mental health issues, and being at risk of suicide. Our findings include:

  • 100% of these clients were assessed as at clinical risk of harm caused by detention and 82% had already experienced deterioration in their mental state by the time they were seen by a Medical Justice clinician. Not a single one of them had a safeguarding report, as they should have done, from the IRC healthcare department to identify them to the Home Office as at risk of harm under a process known as Rule 35(1)
  • 67% had no communication of any type by the IRC healthcare department to the Home Office explicitly addressing the risk to their health from detention, prior to their assessment by a Medical Justice clinician
  • 87% had suicidal and/or self-harm thoughts recorded by a Medical Justice clinician at their assessment – all were deprived of a safeguarding report identifying their risk of suicide (Rule 35(2))
  • 76% were assessed by our clinicians as having symptoms or a diagnosis of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder
  • Only 51% saw a GP within the required 24 hours of admission to the IRC. Where identified as needing a Rule 35 safeguarding report, the average wait for an appointment was 29 days – one person’s appointment took 119 days
  • Home Office case-workers only released 1 of our 45 vulnerable clients when given information about their vulnerability under safeguarding processes, many of whom included torture survivors

“My health was getting worse in detention. I felt like I couldn’t live anymore, I didn’t know what to do, it was really really terrible … they knew what was happening to me, that I needed help…. There is no help. Ask healthcare, they blame it on the Home Office, and the Home Office will in turn blame healthcare. It feels like you are buried alive.”
Dr D, torture survivor, detained for 4 months despite deterioration in mental health

“Our medical evidence is that extensive Home Office failures mean its safeguarding processes are so ineffective they are basically fictional. Medical Justice fears torture survivors and people who are mentally ill and suicidal could be sent to Rwanda, given the ongoing gross Home Office systemic failures in safeguards for detained people. The Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with Rwanda indicates that slavery and human trafficking survivors will be sent to Rwanda by the UK.

The impact on vulnerable asylum seekers could be devastating. Medical evidence of the harm inflicted would be beyond our reach so we would not be able to collate it in reports like “Harmed Not Heard” which are used to hold the government to account. These vulnerable asylum seekers could be ‘out of sight, out of mind’ in Rwanda with little chance of being heard.”
Medical Justice spokesperson

Evidence heard at public inquiry demonstrates extent of the Home Office’s safeguarding failures

The clinical expert appointed by the Brook House IRC Public Inquiry into mistreatment of detained people, Dr Jake Hard, concluded in March 2022 that there was “a complete systems failure” of safeguards to identify and release vulnerable people in detention. The Head of Healthcare, and the lead GP (still both working at Brook House IRC) gave evidence of systemic deficiencies and that they are continuing. Our report shows these deficiencies are not confined to Brook House and apply across the detention estate.

Victims of slavery and human trafficking, and possibly other vulnerable people, set to be sent to Rwanda

On 14th April 2022 the Home Office announced its MoU outlining how asylum seekers will be sent to Rwanda. It commits to undertaking an “initial screening” of asylum seekers before sending them. The evidence from ‘Harmed Not Heard’, and from all our work since Medical Justice was founded in 2005, demonstrates that the Home Office is incapable of effective screening for vulnerabilities. This seems to be anticipated in the MoU which states the UK will take back and “resettle a portion of Rwanda’s most vulnerable refugees” in the UK. The MoU indicates that victims of modern slavery and human trafficking will be sent to Rwanda.

Vulnerable asylum seekers set to be held in quasi-detention in a tiny Yorkshire hamlet within weeks

Also announced on 14th April is an ‘Accommodation Centre’ at RAF Linton-on-Ouse which the Home Office plans to open in a matter of weeks, where it will place 1,500 asylum seeking men. Linton-on-Ouse is village, with 500 residents, according to one of them.

The Home Office has said that Napier Barracks, where a few hundred asylum seeking men are placed, is the ‘pilot’ for ‘Accommodation Centres’. The All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Immigration Detention considers Napier Barracks to be ‘quasi-detention’ and that asylum seekers placed there “have been subjected to appalling treatment and conditions”.

The APPG found that the Home Office had failed to apply it’s own “suitability criteria” which is meant to screen out highly vulnerable asylum seekers. The “suitability criteria” that the Home Office refers to for Linton-on-Ouse may be the same as at Napier, and as dysfunctional. The Home Office Factsheet for Linton-on-Ouse says “There will be robust processes in place to assess and manage vulnerabilities”, so it’s not clear to what extent, if at all, vulnerable asylum seekers are screened out.

Contact : Emma Ginn on 07786 517379 / emma.ginn@medicaljustice.org.uk

Vacancy – Researcher (part-time) for 1 year parental leave cover

Join a dynamic team dedicated to ending the mistreatment of immigration detainees!

Lead Medical Justice research, drawing on our evidence of the harm caused by immigration detention, and contribute to the wider advocacy programme.

Download the Application Pack here >>

 

 

Role: Researcher

Salary:  £33,206 pro-rata

Reports to: Policy, Research & Parliamentary Manager

Working hours:  2 or 3 days a week

Based: Based in the Medical Justice office near Finsbury Park, London, with flexibility to work at home some of the time, subject to duties required and prior agreement.

Length of contract: 1 year. The probation period is 6 months.

Terms: 28 days annual leave per annum plus statutory bank holidays

Closing date: Thursday 19th May 2022

Interviews: Tuesday 24th May 2022 – this will include a written and verbal exercise

Ideal timeframe for starting the job: beginning of June 2022

To apply:  This vacancy has now been filled

Job Vacancy: Clinical Advisor

We have an exciting opportunity to join the Medical Justice team as a Clinical Advisor.

 

Job Title: Clinical Advisor

Salary: £10,596.20 per annum per day (for 2 days a week; £52,981.01per annum prorata).

Reports to: Casework Manager

Working hours: 2 days a week depending on the candidate’s availability. Flexible working arrangements are possible. The post holder will be expected to be flexible and respond to occasional out of hours emergency needs.

Based: At our Office in Finsbury Park, London, and remotely from home. There is also a requirement to attend Immigration Removal Centres (IRCs) to carry out visits to detainees.

Length of contract: 1 year – renewable subject to funding

Terms: Pro rata 24 days per annum holiday, plus statutory bank holidays And up to 4 days associated with Medical Justice’s Christmas/New Year closure

Timeline: Application deadline – Thursday 20th January 2022.

 

If you are interested and would like to apply please read the Job Description and complete the application form. Email your completed application form and your CV to Anthony at a.omar@medicaljustice.org.uk

APPG on Immigration Detention Inquiry into Quasi-Detention

Full Report Published Today

The All-Party Parliamentary group (APPG) on Immigration Detention has today published a report following its inquiry into quasi-detention, calling on the government to end its use of Napier Barracks to accommodate people seeking asylum and to scrap its plans for 9 ‘accommodation centres’ for 8,000 people seeking asylum seekers based on the barracks as a ‘pilot’. Please see the below APPG press release.

Meanwhile, the High Court has now granted permission for a judicial review to proceed to a full hearing challenging the Home Office’s decision, without consultation, to continue using Napier Barracks as asylum accommodation for a further five years.

 

 

 

Former residents at the barracks said:

 

“It would be difficult to design a system that more perfectly delivers despair and deteriorating human health and mental capacity than these ‘asylum camps’

“My initial reaction was shock as I was driven through the barbed-wire-topped gates of an army camp and faced with a black metal firing target of a soldier. … Between us we had fled torture, false imprisonment, war and civil conflict. We now found ourselves inside exactly the sort of institution many of us had already experienced in our home countries and which brought back terrible memories and stirred up traumas.

“There have protestors outside of the camp gates. They shout and set off fireworks. It is terrifying as it sounds like gunfire. … they were there they took photographs and videos of me. I have seen that some videos of residents in the camp have been posted on YouTube … it might put my family in Syria at risk because the government in Syria may then identify me as an asylum seeker.”

– Kenan describing Penally Barracks

“Places like Napier barracks do not represent the values of the people of this country. It encourages discrimination, hostility and hate. Vulnerable people have been suffering mentally and physically by staying there. The ones who were moved out from Napier barracks are still dealing with the mental health consequences of it. their rights were harmed and their dignity was disrespected and it all happened while they were present in the country and they had legal support. I cannot imagine how worse it can be if they were processed offshore without anyone to assess and observe”.

– Erfan, describing Napier Barracks

 

 

APPG press release:

Cross-party call by parliamentarians to end dehumanising quasi-detention of people seeking asylum

In the wake of the Channel crossing tragedy, where 27 people lost their lives trying to reach the UK, a cross-party group of parliamentarians has today published a report calling on the government to end its use of Napier Barracks in Kent to accommodate people seeking asylum.  The report also recommends the scrapping of government plans for more large-scale accommodation based on Napier as a pilot.

The quasi-detention sites examined in the report replicate many of the features found in detained settings – including visible security measures, surveillance, shared living quarters, lack of privacy, poor access to healthcare, legal advice and means of communication, and isolation from the wider community.

The report is the result of an inquiry by the APPG on Immigration Detention into the use of the sites. Led by a panel of 10 parliamentarians from both government and opposition parties, the APPG Inquiry gathered written and oral evidence from over 30 participants – including people accommodated at the sites and charities working directly with them, medical and legal experts, and on-site contractors.

The report explains how features of the sites – including their prison-like conditions – make them “fundamentally unsuitable” as asylum accommodation. For survivors of torture, trafficking or other serious forms of violence – as many asylum-seekers are – such conditions can cause them to relive past abuses and be highly re-traumatising.

The report also documents serious operational failings by the Home Office and its contractors in their running of the sites. It details how people accommodated at the sites have been subjected to “appalling treatment and conditions” which has left them feeling “dehumanised, exhausted and suffering a profound deterioration in their mental health, in some cases to the point of attempting suicide”.

In August this year, the government extended its use of Napier Barracks until 2025 without consultation. The High Court has now granted permission for a judicial review challenging this decision. The government has also confirmed that Napier may act as a pilot for the new asylum accommodation centres proposed in the Nationality and Borders Bill currently making its way through Parliament.

In its report, the APPG Inquiry Panel makes clear its opposition to these centres. It urges the government instead to ensure that people seeking asylum are housed in decent, safe accommodation in the community that supports their well-being and recovery from trauma, facilitates their engagement with the asylum process, and allows them to build links with their community.

In March this year, the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration & Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons (HMIP) found two of the sites, Napier Barracks and Penally Camp, to be “impoverished, run-down and unsuitable for long-term accommodation”.[1] Similarly, in a high-profile case the High Court ruled in June that Napier Barracks failed to meet minimum standards of accommodation for asylum seekers, and that for a period residents were unlawfully detained there under purported Covid rules.[2]

Evidence submitted to the APPG Inquiry demonstrated that few improvements had been made by the Home Office since these serious concerns were raised.

 

 

Alison Thewliss, MP for Glasgow Central and Chair of the APPG on Immigration Detention, commented:

 

“The report makes for sober reading. It has highlighted the myriad ways in which the Home Office is comprehensively failing some of the most vulnerable people in society. Those forced to stay in quasi-detention accommodation have included children, people who have survived torture or trafficking, and other at-risk groups

“Our worst fears have been confirmed that this type of accommodation is not only inappropriate, but downright harmful.

“The Home Office have presided over a litany of failures- not only are the sites themselves unsuitable, but their running and mismanagement of Napier Barracks and other large scale accommodation units has actively contributed to poor mental and physical health outcomes for residents, with barely existent safeguarding.

“The accounts of witnesses were heart-breaking and painted a picture of misery and a disregard for medical and legal rights. It is even more worrying that the Home Office themselves described this situation as a ‘pilot project’, suggesting this is the beginning of a new approach. Plans for ‘offshoring’ in the Nationalities and Borders Bill being debated this week certainly imply that there is worse to come, and we should not stand for it.

“The Home Office must listen to experts and survivors of this disastrous scheme and put a stop to quasi-detention once and for all.”

 

 

Notes

  1. For media enquiries, please contact Elspeth Macdonald on contact@appgdetention.org.uk / 07784 034660.
  2. Former residents at Napier and Penally have kindly offered to be interviewed. Please contact Elspeth Macdonald (contact details above) if this is of interest.
  3. The All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Immigration Detention comprises over 40 parliamentarians from across all main political parties who share concerns about the use of immigration detention in the UK. More information about the group, including its full membership list, is available at detention.org.uk.
  4. More information about the inquiry, including links to the written and oral evidence collected, are available at https://appgdetention.org.uk/inquiry-into-quasi-detention/.
  5. The inquiry panel members were:Alison Thewliss MP (SNP) – APPG chair
    Paul Blomfield MP (Labour)
    Wendy Chamberlain MP (Liberal Democrat)
    Mary Foy MP (Labour)
    Richard Fuller MP (Conservative)
    Helen Hayes MP (Labour)
    Anne McLaughlin MP (SNP)
    Bell Ribeiro-Addy MP (Labour)
    Lord Roberts of Llandudno (Liberal Democrat)
    Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Labour)

[1] See: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/an-inspection-of-the-use-of-contingency-asylum-accommodation-key-findings-from-site-visits-to-penally-camp-and-napier-barracks

[2] See: R (NB & Ors) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2021] EWHC 1489 (Admin)