Skip to content
Donate

Category: News

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)

Brook House Public Inquiry

Public hearings start 10am Tuesday 23rd November 2021

Hearings begin investigating dehumanising abuse of people held in immigration detention

Livestream the hearing on the Inquiry’s YouTube channel >>

The Brook House Public Inquiry was set up to investigate disturbing images of people detained indefinitely at Brook House Immigration Removal Centre (IRC) being mistreated by G4S guards, secretly filmed by the BBC in 2017  The BBC footage depicts high levels of self-harm and abuse that appeared widespread and normalised, ranging from casual and degrading, to extremely violent and life-threatening.

 

BBC Panorama – “Undercover: Britain’s Immigration Secrets”

 

Those whose evidence will be heard include our former detained clients regarding their experience of degrading racist, physical and verbal abuse at the hands of G4S staff, as well as those G4S staff and Home Office officials responsible for immigration detention. Issues of corporate and state accountability will be investigated, including the extent to which the Home Office, G4S and others are responsible for what has gone on.

This is the first ever public inquiry into immigration detention in the UK – the first time those responsible for immigration detention at the Home Office have been compelled to hand over evidence, or be witnesses about the incidents under investigation. Unsurprisingly, the Home Office fought against a public inquiry. To secure the Inquiry, formerly detained individuals who were abused had to go to court to force the Home Office, responsible for the abuse, to be accountable.

The Inquiry will reach conclusions with regard to the treatment of people detained where there is credible evidence of inhuman or degrading treatment, or punishment. The Inquiry’s investigations will include whether any clinical care issues caused or contributed to any identified mistreatment.

 

 

“Ongoing mistreatment of those detained at Brook House and other IRCs is evident in our casework every day.  Many of our clients are extremely vulnerable. Torture survivors can be retraumatised by detention.  This can be compounded when they are subjected to ‘control & restraint’ by guards, which is sometimes used even in response to self-harming, agitation and distress. This can be experienced as a terrifying re-enactment of past abuse. Medical Justice clinicians document fresh injuries sustained as a result of the use of force; as well as the psychological impact, which can be lasting.

Our clinicians continue to see catastrophic and systemic failures at Brook House IRC. The wholly inadequate treatment of highly vulnerable people, coupled with an alarming rate of self-harm and suicidality at Brook House IRC right now, means the place is unsafe and should be closed immediately. “

Emma Ginn – Director, Medical Justice

 

 

Medical Justice is a small charity that sends volunteer clinicians to assess people held in IRCs across the UK, documenting their scars of torture, serious medical conditions, injuries inflicted by guards, deterioration of health in detention, and instances of medical mistreatment. We assist between 600 and 1,000 people in detention each year. Ever since Medical Justice was established in 2005, we have been providing a constant stream of evidence – week in and week out – of inappropriate detention of vulnerable clients’ and medical mistreatment.

Our evidence is to be heard in the second half of the Inquiry. Medical Justice has intimate knowledge of the failings of Brook House as we spoke to 110 people held there in the Inquiry’s timeframe. Our evidence will comprise a mixture of at least 44 case studies from that time as well as our work with current clients. Medical Justice’s experience is that the failings in 2017 continue to this day.

 

 

Available for interview: A former Medical Justice client who was detained at Brook House IRC and a Medical Justice clinician.

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

Note: Medical Justice is represented by Bhatt Murphy Solicitors who are instructing Shu Shin Luh of Doughty Street Chambers and Stephanie Harrison QC and Laura Profumo of Garden Court Chambers.

About the Inquiry:

  1. The hearings will commence at 10am on 23 November 2021 and will be held at the Inquiry’s premises within the International Dispute Resolution Centre, 1 Paternoster Lane, London, EC4M 7BQ.
  2. Hearings can be attended in person. If you wish to attend, please register by emailing enquiries@brookhouseinquiry.org.uk
  3. Hearings can also be viewed via the livestream on the Inquiry’s YouTube channel and a transcript will be uploaded to the Inquiry website following each day’s hearings.
  4. Details of upcoming and previous hearings will be available through the Inquiry’s website.
  5. Updates on proceedings will also be given via the Inquiry’s social media channels and website. Follow @BrookInquiry on Twitter or check the news section of the website https://brookhouseinquiry.org.uk/news/

Vacancy: Caseworker / Trainee Caseworker

Would you like to work as a Caseworker for Medical Justice assisting immigration detainees?

Come and work with Medical Justice, a small and dynamic team that builds on casework to produce research that is used to challenge systemic failures in healthcare provision in immigration detention. We expose medical mistreatment in detention and strive for lasting change for all detainees through policy work, strategic litigation, media coverage and parliamentary action.

“It has been inspiring working with such amazing people both inside and outside of detention. The role gives so much scope for building meaningful relationships with those we work with and I always felt that casework was being fed into wider strategies to end the injustice of detention.“

Sam, a former Medical Justice caseworker

 

 

Job Purpose: Ensure Medical Justice assists as many detainees as it can and as well as it can to access adequate healthcare and obtain high-quality independent medical evidence to progress their legal case.

Salary: Depending on experience – £24,837 (Trainee Caseworker) to £27,378 (Caseworker) with an annual increase of £500 for 5 years.

Trainee position: This is not linked to a formal training programme. It will normally be expected that the Caseworker Trainee will progress to Caseworker after 2 years – the salary and level of responsibility will increase, whilst the level of supervision will decrease.

Reports to: Casework Manager

Working hours: Full-time

Based: Medical Justice office with some flexibility for working from home after an initial period

Length of contract: 2 years, with renewal if funding available

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

Timeline: Application deadline – Thursday 21st October 2021. Interviews will be held on Tuesday 26th and Friday 29th October 2021.  Ideal start date – as soon as possible.

To apply: Please read the Job Description and complete the application form. Email your competed application form and your CV to Anthony at a.omar@medicaljustice.org.uk

APPG Inquiry into quasi-detention

Watch the first oral evidence session

 

Last week on 1st July 2021 the All Party-Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Immigration Detention held the first oral evidence session of its inquiry into the use of “quasi-detention” sites to house asylum seekers, such as Napier Barracks which replicates many of the features found in immigration detention settings.

Read the Evening Standard article about the evidence session here.

“people were attempting suicide through cutting themselves and trying to hang themselves. So they went to hospital. But even some of them were then sent back to the camp and not moved out.”

– Sue Willman, Deighton Pierce Glynn

 

Part One: Legal Issues

Witnesses:

Clare Jennings – Director and Head of Public Law and Community Care, Mathew Gold & Co. Solicitors

Sonia Lenegan – Legal Director, Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association

Shu Shin Luh – Barrister, Doughty Street Chambers

Sue Willman – Solicitor / Consultant, Deighton Pierce Glynn

 

Part Two: Health Issues

Witnesses:

Dr Yusuf Cifti – Policy and Advocacy Manager, Doctors of the World

Dr Juliet Cohen – Head of Doctors, Freedom from Torture

Dr Jill O’Leary – GP / Head of Medical Advisory Service, Helen Bamber Foundation

Dr Piyal Sen – Member, Working Group on the Mental Health of Asylum Seekers and Refugees, Royal College of Psychiatrists

 

The inquiry panel members are:

Alison Thewliss MP (SNP) – APPG chair (right)
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)

Some extracts from the evidence session last week:

“The decision to process asylum claims in the barracks with no safeguards to ensure proper access to legal advice, then you’re layering on top of an already unlawful, inadequate arrangements, a further risk of further inadequacy. And so the only inference you could really draw from the state of play at the moment is that the Home Secretary simply doesn’t know whether or not the use of the barracks is lawful and can be used lawfully.”

Shu Shin Luh – Barrister, Doughty Street Chambers

 

“It has appeared to me that the Home Office had been using the judicial review process and lawyers as almost a way of identifying who shouldn’t be in the barracks” ….. “one of my clients was texting us late at night expressing suicidal thoughts and that if we didn’t get him out of there he couldn’t go on.“ Regarding asylum seekers transferred from Napier barracks to Tinsley House Immigration Removal Centre for ‘bail accommodation’ …“They felt like they were in prison because that’s exactly exactly where they were. … If a person who approaches the local authority is homeless and out of a homelessness duty, you wouldn’t put them in a prison because it happened to be some spare beds there”

Clare Jennings – Mathew Gold & Co. Solicitors

 

In relation to the New Plan for Immigration and the Nationality and Borders Bill introduced this week … “These plans will include proposals for reception centres to provide basic accommodation while processing the claims of asylum seekers. What is happening in Napier at the moment fits that description … what we seem to have in Napier is a reception centre without any procedural safeguards. A key one would be to ensure that people have access to a lawyer at a sufficiently early stage”

Sonia Lenegan – Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association

 

“74% of the people we’ve spoken to said that they have a bad or very bad health in general and 70% are diagnosed with psychological conditions” … “we spoke to a man who had begun to experience severe stomach pain, but there was no action for 24 hours by the by the staff members on the site. And after 24 hours, an ambulance was called and the man was taken to a hospital and diagnosed with a medical condition which, if untreated, could easily lead to life threatening medical complications. The man was offered surgery, but he refused to take the surgery because he thought that he wouldn’t take care of himself in the recovery stage when he was sent to the barracks”

Dr Yusuf Cifti – Policy and Advocacy Manager, Doctors of the World

 

“If somebody has to pass the barrier of the nurse in the camp who they see as a state employee, an agent of the state, and the very nature of torture is that it destroys your trust in the state.”

Dr Juliet Cohen – Freedom from Torture

 

“All of them at Napier reported having felt depressed since they arrived there and a third of them said they had felt suicidal” … “the screening processes are not fit for purpose. … we’re not aware of any form of safeguarding provision for mental health”

Dr Jill O’Leary – Helen Bamber Foundation

 

“There’s virtually no screening program for identifying mental health vulnerabilities for this group” … “You don’t even have primary mental healthcare” … “healthcare is bordering on nonexistent”

Dr Piyal Sen – Member, Working Group on the Mental Health of Asylum Seekers and Refugees, Royal College of Psychiatrists

 

Described “unbelievably inhumane conditions” and an “unacceptable and shameful situation for this group of vulnerable human beings”

Mary Foy MP

 

“It is very concerning that the UK Government has described asylum seekers being accommodated at the barracks as “not analogous to British Citizens” and that “less generous” support is therefore available to them. We have seen how this has translated into real harm suffered by real people who are vulnerable and have sought safety in this country.
There is a widely held belief that the barracks are being used as a model on which to base the ‘asylum reception centres’ outlined in the UK Government’s recently published New Plan for Immigration. The APPG’s inquiry comes at a crucial time, and I believe its findings will speak to the fairer and more just society that many of us want to be.”

Alison Thewliss MP – Chair of the APPG