Skip to content

Category: News

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.

Contactemma.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

 

 

MPs have #30DaysToAct for detained trafficking victims

Stealth legislation grants new powers to detain victims “on even wider scale”

 

Under new policy, passed without debate, people recognised by the Home Office as ‘potential trafficking victims’ will still be liable for detention as a result of their immigration status

Home Office acknowledges increase in detained trafficking victims “may be an effect” of new policy passed through Parliament without scrutiny

Parliament’s Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee (SLSC) label the ‘consultation’ “poor practice”, raising concerns around process

Home Office has told the SLSC that legal entitlements to support for potential victims will be delivered from within detention rather than the community

MPs have only 30 days to object (via a ‘fatal’ Early Day Motion), due to be tabled tonight, and secure a debate on this issue, otherwise policy comes into force on 25 May 2021

Act: Tweet your MP / Email your MP

Read the the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee report, with evidence provided by NGOs led by Medical Justice’s Elspeth Macdonald and Theresa Schleicher

View a Briefing for MPs on the subject complied by the group of NGOs

 

Under sweeping changes, even those with a legal entitlement to trafficking support will have to provide additional ‘evidence’ of vulnerability to be considered for release from detention.

 

NGOs have condemned the changes, which will see safeguards further eroded for victims of trafficking wrongfully detained due to their immigration status. Since 2019 alone, 2,914 potential victims of trafficking who should have had access to safe housing, counselling, and medical intervention were locked behind bars due to their immigration status.[1]

Now, changes in detention guidance will bring potential trafficking victims under a more ‘general’ policy for vulnerable people in detention, known as the ‘Adults at Risk’ (AAR policy). These changes will downgrade the value of trafficking status within detention decision making, and introduce a higher evidence threshold for victims to access support.[2] As a result, more survivors “may be detained, and for longer” according to a submission to the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee.[3]

Submitting concerns to the committee, non profits After ExploitationAnti Slavery InternationalBail for Immigration DetaineesFocus on Labour ExploitationFreedom From Torture, Medical Justice and The Helen Bamber Foundation explain:

“The very fact that a Potential Victim of Trafficking (PVoT) has been trafficked often leads to them having a negative immigration history.

For example, being under the control of a trafficker may result in the person entering the country unlawfully, being unable to claim asylum as soon as they arrive, or being unable to travel in order to report.

Secondly, in order to benefit from a stronger protection against detention (i.e. that afforded at Level 3), once brought under the [more general] Adults at Risk (AAR) Guidance, PVoTs with a positive Reasonable Grounds decision [Potential Victim of Trafficking status issued by the Home Office] will now need to provide additional professional evidence demonstrating not only that they are an adult at risk, but that detention is likely to cause them harm.

Therefore, compared to the current arrangements, the amended AAR Guidance will make it significantly more difficult for PVoTs to avoid or secure release from detention.”

In relation to the risk of more victims being detained for longer, the SLSC confirms that “the Home Office response indicates that this may be an effect for some individuals”. Within the submission, Home Office evidence recognises that potential victims are entitled to certain rights such as those “under Articles 12 and 13 of the Council of Europe Convention on Action against Trafficking in Human Beings (ECAT)”. However, the Government submission argues that these rights “will continue” to be delivered within detention rather than in the community.

The changes have been made via a negative ‘Statutory Instrument’ (SI), which allows Government to make changes to guidance, under the banner of an existing Act of Parliament.[4] A ‘negative SI’ is not subject to Parliamentary debate or scrutiny, and the only way to annul this is through a ‘fatal’ Early Day Motion (EDM), which is being tabled tonight by John McDonnell MP. Specialist NGOs are encouraging MPs to sign the motion, as there are only #30DaysToAct for survivors of modern slavery.

The Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee (SLSC) called the Home Office’s consultation on the changes “poor practice” with limited NGOs involved, many of whom had only two weeks to respond. No survivor groups were included in the consultation.

John McDonnell MP, tabling the Early Day Motion (EDM) to annul Immigration (Guidance on Detention of Vulnerable Persons) Regulations 2021 (SI 2021/184), said:

“This law change is completely counter-productive and will deter victims from coming forward. The Government needs to think again.”

“This change in the law flies in the face of the Government’s stated aims of protecting the victims of trafficking. Contrary to what ministers have claimed about recognising the vulnerability of victims of trafficking, it [the changes] mean that someone trafficked will be at heightened risk of detention.”

After Exploitation’s Director, Maya Esslemont, said:

“Modern slavery is a deeply traumatising form of exploitation, which almost without exception features severe sexual, physical and emotional abuse. It is unthinkable that such serious changes to the treatment of survivors, already made vulnerable by abuse, have been introduced without any real consultation or Parliamentary debate. This policy will condemn more survivors to time behind bars, even when the Home Office recognises they have a legal right to support.”

“It is vital that MPs work at pace to challenge this stealth legislation. This significant change introduces a clear risk to some of the most vulnerable in our society.”

Anti Slavery International’s Researcher and Co-ordinator, Anna Sereni, said:

“Detention centres consistently fail to protect vulnerable people. By increasing the detention of slavery survivors, the government is taking a backward step on its world leading commitment to protect and support survivors of slavery

Survivors of slavery often have complex physical and mental health needs and require unique support to be able to disclose their experiences. The identification of trafficked persons in detention is often poor because people are unable to disclose their experiences in the prison-like settings of detention.

The Government should consider why historically it took the decision not to detain slavery survivors, knowing this would be viewed as a penalty and breach international law.

Despite acknowledging that under these proposals, survivors of slavery will be detained for longer periods, they appear destined to punish slavery survivors because of their commitment to hostile immigration policies.”

Bail For Immigration Detainees (BID)’s Research Co-ordinator, Rudy Schulkind, said:

“Through our front-line work, we meet survivors of human trafficking who should have been provided with support and protection but were instead locked up by the Home Office in prison-like settings with few legal protections or a release date. Unsurprisingly, the impact on victims’ long-term mental health and physical wellbeing is disastrous.

Identification of survivors of trafficking in detention is already poor, as detention settings can rarely make victims feel safe enough to share traumatic experiences.

Changes being introduced by the government will weaken already poor safeguards, and lead to more survivors of trafficking being detained for longer periods. The government has accepted this may be a consequence of the policy change but is pressing ahead regardless.”

Focus on Labour Exploitation (FLEX)’s Senior Policy Manager, Rebecca Kingi, said:

“The UK has positive obligations to support survivors of trafficking and prevent exploitation and we should be doing everything we can to design a system that does just that.”

“These changes are a step backwards for the UK as more victims of trafficking will be at risk of being detained or held in detention for longer periods of time and correspondingly, more individuals scared to come forward for help. The changes serve the interests of perpetrators, not survivors and not the UK’s attempts to stop modern slavery.”

“The proposed changes will have a devastating impact on survivors of trafficking who’ll be at greater risk of being detained and for longer periods of time. But they will also affect disclosure of cases of exploitation because survivors, who already fear that after reporting they won’t be believed and will end up in detention, will become even more fearful since the risk of remaining detained will be greater. Rather than safeguarding survivors, these changes will serve the interest of perpetrators who will continue to use the threat of detention and removal to coerce and control victims into exploitative situations.”

Helen Bamber Foundation’s Medical Director, Professor Cornelius Katona said:

“Many victims of human trafficking/modern slavery have been subjected to prolonged, repeated trauma equivalent to that of victims of torture and have severe mental and physical health problems because of their complex trauma. Immigration detention is likely to cause further deterioration and suffering.”

“Safeguards preventing their detention should be strengthened rather than weakened – as this morally repugnant proposed legislative change is trying to do.”

Medical Justice’s Director, Emma Ginn, said:

“We are extremely concerned about these proposed changes to the policies that should protect survivors of trafficking from immigration detention. The Home Office acknowledges that its changes may lead to more survivors of trafficking being detained for longer; this would mean more vulnerable people suffering lasting harm to their mental health, in situations where this is entirely avoidable.”

“Our volunteer clinicians have repeatedly seen and documented the effects of detention on survivors. The locked doors, the sound of officer’s footsteps approaching, the jangling of the keys, the sudden unannounced transfers at night, the sounds of other distressed detainees, the profound lack of any control over one’s circumstances – all can be highly retraumatising for people who have already experienced abuse at the hands of traffickers.”

“We urge the Home Office to reconsider: rather than weakening existing safeguards, there is an urgent need for the government to strengthen protections for survivors and to ensure such measures are properly effective.

Contact

Requests for comment from legal, medical, policy and slavery experts at the above NGOs contact Maya Esslemont: info@afterexploitation.org / 07415374064

About change in guidance

The Immigration (Guidance on Detention of Vulnerable Persons) Regulations 2021 (SI 2021/184) was laid before Parliament on 25 February 2021.

NGOs argue that survivors are already detained in huge numbers, despite exiting guidance stating that there must be a ‘public order’ reason to do so. Under the Statutory Instrument due to be passed through Parliament without debate, survivors referred by the authorities and recognised as ‘potential trafficking victims’ by the Home Office, will not automatically be considered too ‘at risk’ to detain. The new guidance will expect exploited people to give further evidence of ‘future harm’, via a medical professional, before they are recognised as too vulnerable to be held in prison-like settings. Experts warn the move will lead to survivors being detained on an even wider scale, and for longer.

Useful links

What is modern slavery? Via Anti Slavery International

“Modern slavery in the UK can take many forms, including forced sexual exploitation, domestic slavery or forced labour on farms, in construction, shops, bars, nail bars, car washes or manufacturing. Forced labour is the most common form of slavery in the UK, fueled by a drive for cheap products and services. A growing form of slavery is trafficking into crime. In the UK, it’s fuelled by the trafficking of primarily British children, forced into ‘county lines’ drug trafficking and trafficking of Vietnamese nationals forced to work in cannabis production.”

“Vulnerable people often take big risks in order to provide for their families. Typically, they can be offered an apparently good job in the UK. Often they take a loan from the traffickers in advance.

When they arrive in the UK, the situation is completely different. Their passport might be taken away and they’re told they need to pay off the debt before they can leave. Violence and threats are common. They are trapped here with no possessions, no means to return and totally reliant on their traffickers. Vulnerable British people are also targeted, especially children from disadvantaged backgrounds, to be groomed into drug criminal gangs in so-called ’county lines’ trafficking.”

Why are people held in immigration detention? Via Oxford University’s Migration Observatory

“Immigration detention refers to the Home Office practice of detaining foreign nationals for the purposes of immigration control. Policy reasons for detaining typically include one or more of the following: to effect the person’s removal; to establish their identity or the basis of their immigration or asylum claim; where there is reason to believe they will abscond if released on bail; or when release is not considered to be ‘conducive to the public good’. In some instances, the reasons for a person’s detention change while he or she is being held.”

How do modern slavery survivors end up in detention? Via After Exploitation

“The Home Office introduced a Detention Gatekeeper (DGK) function as part of the wider Adults at Risk (AAR) policy [introduced in 2016], which is supposed to identify individuals too vulnerable for detention. DGK assesses whether detention decisions are “proportionate” and is supposed to identify instances where “individuals may be at risk of harm in detention due to any vulnerabilities”. However, what little data we can publicly access on DGK indicates it rejects referrals for detention infrequently. During a House of Lords debate in September 2020, it was stated by the Government that “Since 2016, the gatekeeper has rejected more than 2,300 referrals for detention.” Given that, prior to the pandemic, around 25,000 people entered detention every year, this number of rejections appears very low.”

 


References

[1] FOI requests by After Exploitation + Women For Refugee Women, published in Survivors Behind Bars (2021). Accessible: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/trafficking-modern-slavery-detained-immigration-home-office-b1797186.html

[2] Accessible: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2021/184/contents/made

[3] Accessible: https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/5150/documents/50839/default/

[4] Accessible: https://www.parliament.uk/about/how/laws/secondary-legislation/#:~:text=What%20is%20Secondary%20Legislation%3F,-Statutory%20instruments%20procedure&text=Secondary%20legislation%20is%20law%20created,and%20

Medical Justice gives oral evidence to the Home Affairs Committee on handling of Covid-19 in IRCs

On Tuesday the 3rd of February Theresa Schleicher of Medical Justice gave oral evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee – “How is the Home Office managing IRCs and asylum accommodation during Covid-19?”

“Since the start of the Covid-19 crisis, we have highlighted the particular risks to physical and mental health that Immigration Removal Centres (IRCs) present during a pandemic – both to those who are detained, to staff and to the wider community. As detention has continued to be used throughout the pandemic, there have been Covid-19 outbreaks in IRCs and detainees have had to self-isolate or be isolated due to the risks from Covid-19 while in detention.”

 

Scroll down to view clips from the committee session and follow the link to download the full sumbission from Medical Justice.

Brook House Inquiry: preliminary hearing

Preliminary Hearing announced for the Independent Inquiry into Brook House

 

The Brook House Inquiry will hold a preliminary hearing at 2pm on the 25 September 2020, streamed live on the Inquiry’s YouTube channel.

 

The independent Inquiry was set up to investigate the mistreatment of detainees at Brook House Immigration Removal Centre from April to August 2017 as depicted by the BBC’s Panorama programme, Under-Cover: Britain’s Immigration Secrets aired on 4 September 2017.

 

 

Continue reading “Brook House Inquiry: preliminary hearing”

Yarl’s Wood expands short-term holding facility

Medical Justice has discovered that there have been no women held in Yarl’s Wood for over a week, but that the short term holding facility known as the “lorry-drop unit” seems to have been expanded.

 

We don’t know if detainees are taken from Yarl’s Wood to charter flights to remove them to European countries or not. We have asked the Home Office what the future plans for Yarl’s Wood are and if detainees there now have access to legal advice under the Detention Duty Advice rota – we have had no response.

Continue reading “Yarl’s Wood expands short-term holding facility”