UK

Mostly Cloudy with Showers 14° London Hi 15°C / Lo 8°C

Languages test for suspect asylum-seekers

By David Hughes, Press Association

Asylum seekers claiming to come from Palestine or Kuwait will face being tested on their own language in a bid to weed out bogus applications under changes announced by ministers today.

Immigration Minister Phil Woolas said a "significant proportion" of Palestinian and Kuwaiti claims were actually from other nationalities.

The change follows a similar effort to tighten up restrictions on Somali asylum applications.

In a written statement to MPs, Mr Woolas said: "Language analysis carried out for some Somali asylum applicants demonstrates that significant proportions of those tested have claimed to be of a nationality, or from a region or grouping, that is not their own in order to try to gain residence in this country.

"We are aware that a significant proportion of Palestinian and Kuwaiti claims also are from other nationalities.

"This new authorisation will assist the Secretary of State to make decisions in individual Palestinian and Kuwaiti cases, and to ascertain the extent of abuse within these nationalities."

Mr Woolas said the Home Secretary could take a refusal to be tested into account when determining a case.

The new power will be reviewed in April 2010.

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

[info]santinox wrote:
Tuesday, 16 June 2009 at 03:58 am (UTC)
Incredible that they havent been doing this as a matter of course for all asylum seekers from day one. Also why are there so many Kuwaiti asylum seekers? Didnt the west free that country from tyranny back in the 90's?
An excellent question santinox!
[info]mannygoldstein wrote:
Tuesday, 16 June 2009 at 05:34 am (UTC)
What checks were done when an asylum seeker was processed before this new requirement? Surely the most basic questions would be to establish the name and identity of someone claiming asylum, and a simple session with an interpreter should have been sufficient to establish their language skills.

As ordinary citizens are subjected to increasingly stringent security checks at the point of entry to the UK, these people seem to gain entry without the most basic questions being asked, let alone answered.
Re: An excellent question santinox!
[info]almightymat wrote:
Tuesday, 16 June 2009 at 10:31 am (UTC)

To be fair, Manny, after reading the article surely the statement is that as ordinary citizens are subjected to increasingly stringent security checks at the point of entry to the UK, "these people" are ALSO being subjected to increasingly stringent security checks at the point of entry to the UK..?
Re: An excellent question santinox!
[info]mannygoldstein wrote:
Tuesday, 16 June 2009 at 02:13 pm (UTC)
I have read the article again, and the comment made by santinox and it seems very clear that the asylum seekers were NOT subject to security checks, let alone stringent ones!

The security checks should have very easily been able to establish their real nationalities by using interpreters who would know whether they have the language skills consistent with the countries that they claim to have come from.

This was not the case, hence the introduction of the new policy, i.e. because security checks were not carried out to establish their country of origin.
Re: An excellent question santinox!
[info]almightymat wrote:
Tuesday, 16 June 2009 at 02:22 pm (UTC)

Hmm, maybe if you had bothered to read MY comment too...you complain that "these people" are not being subjected to "increasingly stringent security checks" but surely the whole point of the article is that the checks ARE increasingly stringent, as they are now using interpreters for security checking..?
Re: An excellent question santinox!
[info]johnylookout wrote:
Thursday, 23 July 2009 at 01:16 pm (UTC)
Language analysis tests have been carried out in the UK since 2003 mainly by a Swedish company called SPRAKAB, a private company who make lots of money backing up the Home office assertions regards an individuals nationality. The use of such analysis has been derided as useless and without any academic merit by academic forensic linguists. Google SPRAKAB and Patrick or Eades for loads of links to articles which destroy the basis for the Governments use of such testing. The Home office try to dress up their decision making process in academic terms. It is, however a sham and impacts horrifically on those who seek safety in this country. Guidelines for the use of Language Analysis in relation to questions of national origin in refugee cases were published by the Language and National Origin Group in 2004. Signed by 19 linguists from six countries, endorsed by the British Association of Applied Linguistics? they make a nonsense of the Home Office's use of language analysis. Some of the comments on this thread unfortunately read as ill informed rants.
Sent back
[info]leonore35 wrote:
Tuesday, 16 June 2009 at 06:18 am (UTC)
Yes of course testing is necessary but the main point is will they be returned if they fail to establish their origin?
uggggh the vile english.....
[info]britfree wrote:
Tuesday, 16 June 2009 at 05:02 pm (UTC)
really hate brown people , they went everywhere stealing everybodys stuff , and still manage to persuade themselves that they were on some kind of civilising mission and not the murderous genocidal greed fest that it really was . now some people whose patrimony you have previously raped to poverty, arrives on your shores and you want to spit on them before they can even get a cup of teas worth back , england, its some piece of work ,eh ?
Languages test for suspect asylum-seekers By David Hughes
[info]exiledjourno wrote:
Friday, 19 June 2009 at 11:02 am (UTC)


I agree that the authorities should do whatever tests needed to determine the authenticity of any claim. But specifying Palestinians in this case is misleading, especially that Palestinians are not offered asylum as easily as the article sounds.
The language or the accent test as well is not a good calibre to determine the authenticity of the claim. Palestinians were forced to become refugees on waves for the last 61 years and those who were born outside Palestine adopted the accents of the hosting countries, and no one can tell the difference just upon linguistic testing. Few minutes of talking to a Palestinian refugee in Lebanon, Syria, or any Gulf country will demonstrate that no way you can tell that they are not original citizens of that country. You have to hear some Scots of Asian origins talking by the phone to understand my point; no way one can tell that they are not 100% of Scottish origin.
I am concerned that should such test is adopted, many vulnerable people in need of protection will be turned away and this would be another miscarriage of justice.

Iqbal Tamimi
A Palestinian Exiled Journalist and NUJ member of Bristol Branch


Re: Languages test for suspect asylum-seekers By David Hughes
[info]johnylookout wrote:
Thursday, 23 July 2009 at 01:13 pm (UTC)
Language analysis tests have been carried out in the UK since 2003 mainly by a Swedish company called SPRAKAB, a private company who make lots of money backing up the Home office assertions regards an individuals nationality. The use of such analysis has been derided as useless and without any academic merit by academic forensic linguists. Google SPRAKAB and Patrick or Eades for loads of links to articles which destroy the basis for the Governments use of such testing. The Home office try to dress up their decision making process in academic terms. It is, however a sham and impacts horrifically on those who seek safety in this country. Guidelines for the use of Language Analysis in relation to questions of national origin in refugee cases were published by the Language and National Origin Group in 2004. Signed by 19 linguists from six countries, endorsed by the British Association of Applied Linguistics? they make a nonsense of the Home Office's use of language analysis. Some of the comments on this thread unfortunately read as ill informed rants.

Most popular


Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date