Torture Victims Held In Detention Because Of Unsuitable UK Border Agency Process

Asylum Seekers

First Posted: 23/02/2012 06:36 Updated: 23/02/2012 06:36   PA

Victims of torture are being held in detention while their asylum claims are assessed due to an unsuitable screening process, inspectors have claimed.

The system used by the troubled UK Border Agency (UKBA) was not tailored to determine whether an asylum seeker was suitable for the detained fast-track (DFT) scheme, a review found.

John Vine, the independent Chief Inspector of the UK Border Agency (UKBA), said there was "a particular risk that the victims of torture or trafficking could be allocated to the DFT contrary to the agency's own policy".

The scheme, first brought in eight years ago when asylum applications were at record levels, is used when officials deem that an individual's circumstances are uncomplicated and a decision can be made quickly while they are held in detention.

But Mr Vine said "a significant number of people initially screened as suitable for the DFT were subsequently released".

A review of 114 cases found 30% were taken out of detention at some stage and 27% of these were released before a decision on their asylum claim had been made.

Almost half of these (44%) were released due to health issues and evidence they were victims of torture or trafficking while almost a third (32%) were released because of difficulties in obtaining travel documentation for removal.

Mr Vine said: "While safeguards were in place once people had been detained, there remained a particular risk that the victims of torture or trafficking could be allocated to the DFT contrary to the agency's own policy."

Keith Best, chief executive of Freedom from Torture, said: "Survivors of torture keep being wrongly allocated to the detained fast-track.

"We agree that improving the privacy of screening will help some survivors to share their horrific experiences with officials.

"That said, no amount of tinkering with the format of screening will get around the fact that UKBA cannot seek details of the asylum claim at this early stage because applicants have not yet had access to legal advice."

He added that the report's findings, "if followed through to their logical conclusion, have a far stronger implication - that the DFT is flawed by design and has no place in a fair asylum system."

Dr Juliet Cohen, the group's head of doctors, added: "When a person has been tortured by uniformed figures in a detention setting, further detention is likely to be traumatising and inhibit their ability to give a detailed account of everything they have suffered.

"This is exactly why UKBA policy is not to process torture survivors through DFT. However in reality a number of extremely vulnerable people are still regularly routed in."

Donna Covey, chief executive of the Refugee Council, said: "It is unacceptable that victims of torture or trafficking are being allocated to the DFT because of a hurried and completely unsuitable screening process.

"Instead of focusing on meeting set timescales and celebrating high removal rates, we urge the Government to review whether the DFT can really be part of a fair, effective asylum system.

"In the meantime, they must stop detaining people in the fast-track process unless they can guarantee no victims of trafficking or torture will be part of this."

The report also found that more than a third (38%) of asylum seekers detained while their claims are being assessed are held for longer than three months before being removed.

On average, decisions alone were taking 13 days to be made, despite the agency's stated target of just three to four days.

These delays in interviewing the asylum seekers led to more than £100,000 in extra costs in the sample cases alone.

Mr Vine, whose reviews of the UKBA's work has led to Home Secretary Theresa May splitting off the work of the Border Force into a separate agency from next month, added that in the cases sampled, only one person was granted asylum and 98 were refused.

Overall, less than three quarters (73%) of people whose claims were refused and who had no right to remain in the UK were removed, despite the appeals process upholding 93% of the UKBA's decisions.

But Jerome Phelps, director of Detention Action, said the scheme was "outdated, unfair and expensive".

"The Government policy of routinely depriving people of their liberty for weeks and months simply for claiming asylum, for the Government's administrative convenience, is one that must be abolished," he said.

A UKBA spokesman said: "The DFT system plays a fundamental role in making sure asylum claims can be processed and decided as swiftly as possible.

"This helps those who are granted asylum quickly build lives within the country, while ensuring we can remove people who have no right to remain in the UK.

"Around three quarters of people whose claims were refused were removed from the UK. Of those, almost two thirds were removed within three months.

"However, we are allocating more staff to help speed up the processing of these cases."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST UK

Victims of torture are being held in detention while their asylum claims are assessed due to an unsuitable screening process, inspectors have claimed. The system used by the troubled UK Border Agen...
Victims of torture are being held in detention while their asylum claims are assessed due to an unsuitable screening process, inspectors have claimed. The system used by the troubled UK Border Agen...
Filed by David Hobbs  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 43
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
17:14 on 23/02/2012
No doubt another claim for compensation on it's way, for which we will shell out some more millions, because someone cannot do his or her job correctly. I am sick of watching our taxes being paid out to immigrants, that have no right to be in this country, but who use and abuse the system because we let them. This country is only big enough to support 50m bodies, the rest need to be returned to the country of origin irrespective of why they had to leave and the sooner the better..
16:43 on 23/02/2012
I would love to be a censor for the wonderful Huffington Post. A job where I could stay at home perhaps, and with the correct software keys remove all those posts which are unacceptable to my University education or should I say lefty middleclass indoctrination.

I would remove all posts which mentioned that many asylum seekers have arrived via 25 safe nations before reaching the UK.

I would take out any talk that their rented home is paid for by the taxpayer and they never have to worry about utility bills since the home must have a credit meter paid by the taxpayer.

I would be aghast if someone said that asylum seeker rented property had to have a colour TV at least of size 22" with the TV license paid for.

It would be impossible for me to tolerate that the rented home had to be redecorated every 3 years, and that once granted asylum they can bring their dependants to the UK and scrub right away the suggestions that they are not real dependents.

I would remove every statement that landlords for asylum seekers have to sign The Official Secrets Act such that the public are not told what asylum seekers receive.

So please, please, please dear Huffy Post take me on as one of your censors and I will do the job for nothing.
15:40 on 23/02/2012
The reason so many of you complain about having posts removed is because you hinted or suggested that the UK cannot take everyone who arrives at our shores with a daft story about wanting asylum.

You all must remember that the only answer is to reside in those parts of the UK where one never views the effects of immigration, and take note it is essential that we must accept everyone no matter if they are asylum seekers, economic migrants, freeloaders or just out to exploit the system. (just view where your MP resides most of the time)

Become one of the woolly liberal middleclass and plan your retirement in a less crowded nation and within a monoculture and then you too can go on BBC Question Time, and state what a wonderful contribution immigrants make to the UK.

This summer you too can practice your own Olympian running skills as you lean to move away from the suicide bombers now tooling up in Walthamstow. Isn't life grand?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mickbono
huff is crap
15:21 on 23/02/2012
one of my posts have been removed & there was nothing bad said in it , it had been on for four hours plus as well
18:42 on 23/02/2012
I'm not sure, but I think if someone doesn't like the way the comments go against their own beliefs, they flag those comments as abusive and HP sometimes just delete them rather than read what is being removed. I've often had comments removed which were totally PC but went against many of the comments made. HP tend to have their own opinions as to which side of a story they want to see supported.
13:04 on 23/02/2012
Here we go again no doubt about it millions more of the hard pressed tax payers money will be paid out in compo for the so called suffering we have caused these people because of their human rights it does not mater that we give them food shelter money medical care schools and a safe haven, No that is not good enough they also want to sue us for helping them, This country is getting worse by the day !
12:35 on 23/02/2012
Humanitarian reasons aside, they should be thankful that at least they are safe and housed and fed. What more do they want? What has happened to the law about applying for asylum at the first country reached? This is clearly bypassed and these people should be deported to that first country of call or back home if they don't want that. While I agree that people should not be expected to fear for their lives or their safety this small island should not be expected to cater for so many of these individuals out of senses of PC and a border control system that is clearly not fit for purpose.
12:21 on 23/02/2012
Sorry but me thinks there are certain people in this country who swallow a good sob story from the most cunning of people who know a good band wagon when they see one and then there are a lot of honest good hard working people who get treated like dirt (even in their own country)!
11:58 on 23/02/2012
How do you prove torture? If someone comes in from another country,its just their word for it. Debateable/questionable or what?
12:35 on 23/02/2012
Usuallt by the state of them - physically and psychologically. But with language barriers it can be hard to prove - so I suppose really holding them in lieu is really the only option before they can be proven one way or the other.
11:55 on 23/02/2012
Are they really torture victims or are they just trying to get into the UK. What country did they come from and are there safe countries between where they lived and the UK. It is time this country atops being the place where all and sundry come to try to rip us off.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Barbara Longstaff
11:51 on 23/02/2012
I am afraid our Benefit system lures these immigrants to the UK, and how do we know they have been tortured, some of them whinge and whine and can tell a wonderful story. They should all be held in Detention Centres until their papers etc can be processed. They should then be given a thorough medical examination and if not suitable then sent right back to where they came from. Harsh you might say - but no we are a small island and it is getting more populated with immigrants each day and we will run out of room soon.
12:14 on 23/02/2012
Scouse55 came up with another valid reason for the UK's attraction in addition to the benefits package - for many coming here, English is often their second language. I agree with what you say about how they should be dealt with at detention centres, however with the intervention of solicitors using the ECHR, we have to treat them with kid gloves, simply keeping them warm and safe until they can be 'processed' apparently breaches the human rights of many of them, despite the life they are leaving behind

Because immigrants/asylum seekers are claiming so many different reasons why they want to come to the UK, too many departments have been set up under the UK Border Agency and Theresa May has lost control. She is giving conflicting guidance rules to associated departments and rather than solve the problem, she has made it twice as bad!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Barbara Longstaff
12:33 on 23/02/2012
I still think Kenneth Clarke is the cause of all this trouble.
11:31 on 23/02/2012
And just how do we really know if they are torture victims? Yes they should ALL be held in custody until everything has been proved one way or the other - it is ridiculous to let any immigrant out onto the streets without this information, as we all know all of those released always turn up when requested, NOT!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mickbono
huff is crap
11:02 on 23/02/2012
well the posts have gone down from 28 down to 13 , well done h u f f , so much for free speech in the uk
11:58 on 23/02/2012
I have just posted but i doubt it will be allowed
10:49 on 23/02/2012
To reach England many of these people pass through France. Why do they not settle in France?
Answers on a postcard please....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mickbono
huff is crap
11:02 on 23/02/2012
think the B word you know why then
11:34 on 23/02/2012
An unfortunate side effect of English being the second language of most third world states, so the destination country is the one that speaks that second language as a first..
11:42 on 23/02/2012
Then why is it that the UK spends millions of £'ss on translators?
The NHS alone, spends £60,000 a day on translation and interpretation services, according to a recent report
12:02 on 23/02/2012
Before I read your comment I had predominantly focused my thoughts on the wonderfully attractive benefits package on offer and hadn't really thought about that reason. It makes a lot of sense so thanks, I learned something new today.
10:36 on 23/02/2012
If they dont like our system return them to their own system ,I am fine with that .Cost us a lot less to .
09:37 on 23/02/2012
i fear the claims are coming , let me ask why someone that has been totured then flees to england should complain about being held in a safe place and being fed 3 times a day , are we spposed to believe every person that comes here and says they have fled a country because of danger , we have to put them somewhere as we cannot allow these people to wander the streets , do they want to be put in hotels ??????????? . if they are not held they disappear and they do ilegal work and keep brits out of a job . on the other hand we should not allow anyone into the country that has passed through 5 or 6 countries to get here .
This comment has been removed.
11:08 on 23/02/2012
Asylum seekers are lured to the UK by its 'enormous' benefits, says the mayor of Calais

Natacha Bouchart said these payouts were the lure for thousands of foreigners using the French port as a staging point to cross the Channel illegally. She said the British system was predominantly to blame for thousands of Africans, eastern Europeans and Asians trying to clamber aboard lorries and trains in Calais every day.

She added ‘Requesting asylum is easier with the British than in France'. The asylum seeker is given accommodation and receives up to £40 a week according to their case, when the ANNUAL income of the average Eritrean is around £135.

In Britain, asylum seekers can receive payments as soon as a claim is lodged. In France, an asylum seeker generally is given nothing for six months.
12:33 on 23/02/2012
If they come for 'benefits' they are not asylum seekers. Asylum seekers seek refuge from torture not a cushy life.
14:44 on 28/02/2012
it's pretty widely accepted that benefits are not the main reason people choose to come to the UK as opposed to anywhere else. even the home office says so - check out this report: http://www.irr.org.uk/pdf/understand_asylum_decision.pdf

the executive summary, page viii, pretty much sums it up: 'There was very little evidence that the sample respondents had a detailed knowledge of: UK
immigration or asylum procedures; entitlements to benefits in the UK; or the availability of work in the UK. There was even less evidence that the respondents had a comparative knowledge of how these phenomena varied between different European countries. Most of the respondents wished to work and support themselves during the determination of their asylum claim rather than be dependent on the state.'

mayor of calais should get her facts right.