UK

Partly Sunny with Showers 9° London Hi 12°C / Lo 6°C

Deportees ‘at risk of abuse’

By Robert Verkaik, Home Affairs editor

Refugees deported from Britain are at risk of ill-treatment and abuse by immigration officers and security guards, a damning report into the system for removing immigrants and failed asylum seekers has found.

In most cases the use of force during the deportation process had the opposite effect and led to the removal attempt being abandoned.

The findings, published today by Anne Owers, the chief inspector of prisons, echo earlier concerns published in the Independent nearly two years ago.

Ms Owers’ report also found “worrying gaps and weaknesses” in the system for complaints made by asylum seekers and in the monitoring of the removal process.

But of greatest concern was the inconsistent use of force by immigration officers as well as failures to provide medical help.

In one case identified by the inspectors, intimidating behaviour towards detainees by overseas escort staff appeared to have led to an immigrant's last-minute refusal to comply with the removal. In another incident a detainee who refused to board a flight only found out that he had been granted a court reprieve on his return to the holding area.

And in an illustration of the chaotic nature of the refugee removal system, two members of an escort team were arrested and detained for two days in Mozambique after the African state refused to recognise the validity of the returning refugee’s documentation. The report also said that Iraq was one of the countries most likely to refuse entry to a asylum seeker being returned by Britain.

Ms Owers said: “It [the investigation] also found variable practice, with no evidence that the good and thoughtful approach of some staff was mirrored in clear and consistent standards of treatment, support and communication. This heightened the risk of ill-treatment or abuse, and was also likely to lead to failed removals.”

Ms Owers added: “We also found examples of cases where reports of incidents that we had observed or noted should have been raised, but had not been. A number of detainees had medical problems, and medical assistance was not always at hand. In other cases, removals were cancelled because of the absence of escort staff, or detainees were returned from countries that refused to accept them.”

The report follows inspections at Heathrow airport from 9–11 December 2008, and at the short-term holding facility within Colnbrook IRC from 17–19 November 2008. A total of 37 detainees were interviewed, mostly at Heathrow.

Ms Owers said: “Most escorts behaved in an appropriate way with distressed detainees, and there were several examples of firm but sensitive and discreet behaviour. However, several staff unnecessarily drew attention to removals or raised tension levels.”

Emma Ginn, co-ordinator of the immigration charity Medical Justice, claimed that the report corroborated many of its own findings published last year which included nearly 300 cases of alleged assault during detention and removal.

“We can see no justification for the use of force, which HMIP says in most cases led to failure of attempted removals – detainees are getting harmed unnecessarily,” said Ms Ginn. “Injuries we have seen include fractured bones, nerve damage, a punctured lung, a dislocated knee and detainees being hurried through airport buildings in wheelchairs as a result. The private escort companies the Home Office contracts shouldn’t be allowed to use force if they have no proper monitoring of it, no routine medical examinations of injuries and no effective means of complaint against its misuse.”

Diane Abbott MP added: “I am highly concerned that the Home Office has shown little motivation in addressing these issues which have been raised with them time and time again. We were told almost a year ago that there would be an investigation into the abuse of immigration detainees during escort and removal. I dearly hope that this is not a case of the Home Office sweeping scandal under the carpet in the hope that it will go away.”

She added: “It is s my hope that the Home Office will get their act together and do what they should have done years ago – ensure full and appropriate training of immigration officials, introduce a rigorous and fair complaints system, stop the removal of people with medical problems, and stop the removal of people to unsafe countries.”

David Wood, director of the Criminality and Detention Group for the UK Border Agency said: “HM Chief Inspector of Prisons found overwhelmingly that our escort staff carry out removals with sensitivity and discretion.

We expect the highest standards of behaviour from staff and contractors. Anyone involved in the detention and removal of detainees is highly trained. We use CCTV and monitors to make sure detainees and staff are safe and secure during removals. Our complaints processes are clear.

Many detainees refuse to leave the UK voluntarily, even when the courts say they must. In some cases individuals become violent toward themselves, the public or our staff when it is time to go home. Detainee escorts have a very difficult job to do in carrying out what the public expects of the UK Border Agency in enforcing our immigration laws. The report of HM Chief Inspector will be carefully considered.”

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

NuLabour's working?
[info]berewic wrote:
Thursday, 13 August 2009 at 02:43 am (UTC)
Unsurprisingly another NuLabour initiative not working.

As 99% of asylum seekers are shown to be bogus, wouldn't it be more productive to treat every application as bogus from the beginning.
Deport all asylum seekers entering the country immediately and stop funding those already here. Those that are here, without free lawyers and government handouts would soon deport themselves.
Re: NuLabour's working?
[info]collin_brown wrote:
Thursday, 13 August 2009 at 09:02 am (UTC)
The Cultural Marxist who run Britain, (the hidden hand) wouldn't like that idea at all.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8630135369495797236
Re: NuLabour's working?
[info]rosejeffmo wrote:
Thursday, 27 August 2009 at 09:44 am (UTC)
The only things that's bogus is your use of statistics. Have a go at actually looking at some of the statistics about asylum-seekers and where they come from before making comments that betray your level of ignorance.
NuLabour working?
[info]berewic wrote:
Thursday, 27 August 2009 at 02:11 pm (UTC)
Lies, more lies and NuLabour statistics. Statistics from a government proven to lie habitually every day on every subject. Nothing, absolutely nothing this government says can be believed or trusted.

99.9% of asylum seekers are bogus. NuLabours gross incompetence is responsible for this mass of bogus claims. Their understanding of an asylum seeker is to throw money at all that apply. Ten years and literally millions of pounds later, these bogus asylum seekers are proved to be bogus. This proof would have been realised within seconds had the government the brains to ask, "where have you just come from"?
For example, those that come through the Folkestone tunnel or any ferry port. 100% of those are bogus and are nothing less than "criminals". If they were genuine they would have applied for asylum long before reaching France let alone Calais.
Some of those that enter via airports could be considered genuine but only those newly arrived from areas recognized as areas from which to flee.

The immigration issue and the grossly corrupt and incompetent way our government is dealing with it, is just one of one hundred thousand and one reasons why NuLabour will be devastated at the next general election.

You can fool all of the people some of the time.
You can fool some of the people all of the time
But you can't fool all of the people all of the time.
There is an answer to avoiding mistreatment
[info]kuma2000 wrote:
Thursday, 13 August 2009 at 09:20 am (UTC)
Don't come to the UK in the first place. These people are not "refugees" or "asylum seekers" as they are being returned which makes them "illegal immigrants". The Indy should pick its words more carefully - inaccurately using emotionally charged words is not very "independent" and is the kind of thing you would expect to see in newspapers like The Sun and The Guardian.
Topsy turvy world of Alice in Wonderland
[info]no_pctalk wrote:
Friday, 14 August 2009 at 12:32 am (UTC)
They are illegal immigrants who refuse to leave the country. A country in which no living soul has granted them residential status, I might add. The immigration officers have a tough job to do dealing
with these characters day in and day out and to add to their woes they have to listen to a report that tells
them they must treat these reprobates with kid gloves even when the offenders are intent on staying put!!!! Do me a favour! What next? A report on manhunting trips for serial killers!!!!

There are plenty of misguided people who would stoop to any lengths to prevent any illegal immigrant being deported at all, end of story. That's why this report has been written and that's why it should be
sent straight to the bin.

Most popular


Article Archive

Day In a Page

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

Select date