At last, the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal have recognised the problems in Zimbabwe. A new decision has just been issued which recognises that those who are not loyal to the regime of President Mugabe may face a real risk of persecution on return to Zimbabwe. This is supported by all the objective evidence and is the view of the leading experts on Zimbabwe. It is also something that I and many other lawyers have been arguing for some time now, without any success.
The decision will affect thousands of failed Zimbabwean asylum seekers who have had their cases rejected and who have been told that they would not face mistreatment should they be returned to Zimbabwe.
The decision is truly a victory for, least of all, common sense. Whilst we have various statements from numerous Government Ministers in both the Commons and the Lords on how bad the deteriorating situation in Zimbabwe is, the Secretary of State for the Home Department has always maintained before the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal that those who ask for protection in the United Kingdom do not require it. The decision at paragraph 135 describes the Home Secretary's position in this litigation as:
“irreconcilable with the public statements of the senior ministers. Where such statement have been made in Parliament, they must it is said, be taken to represent the position of the Government”
It would be interesting to see the figures in relation to how many people claimed asylum from Zimbabwe in the recent years. From first hand experience, I can tell you that the numbers would be high. It would also be interesting to see from the SSHD how many of those claims were rejected. I can also tell you that this would be an extremely(!) high proportion. Let us not forget the role of the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal. It cannot be blame-free. For example, I had a decision last week which stated that the individual concerned would not face persecution on return to Zimbabwe because “the Mugabe regime is no longer in control” Where this came from, goodness only knows. Needless to say, this is currently being appealed. However, decisions of this calibre do not help matters.
It is about time that the Home Office sorted the mess out. There are thousands of Zimbabweans who have failed claims. They are not entitled to benefits and they are not permitted to work. They are not provided with accommodation and are forced to support themselves. Many Zimbabweans I know are on the verge of destitution. They cannot be sent home to Zimbabwe because the SSHD recognised some time ago that the country is so bad that no-one can be returned there. Most other European countries (Sweden, Denmark, Germany etc) also adopt a no-returns approach. The outcome? Limbo.
This case would give the SSHD the opportunity to clear up many of those who deserve status - the families, those in relationships with British nationals, those with British children, those who are politically active in the various exiled opposition groups (with the largest in Britain being the MDC).
MDC UK has active branches across Britain with large groupings in Glasgow, Birmingham and Edinburgh. Many of those activists can be seen at street stalls in the town centres on a Saturday afternoon attempting to raise awareness of what is happening in Zimbabwe. Many of these organisers have been told that they can go back to Zimbabwe without the prospect of facing problems from the CIO (Central Intelligence Organisation) or Mugabe's militia etc. Hopefully this case will turn the tide.
I would like to end this post on an optimistic note. However, knowing the Home Office, I doubt very much whether this case will have the impact it ought to.
1 comment:
The situation you are highlighting demonstrates two key issues which negatively impact upon the workings of the immigration system.
Firstly, there is a lack of coherent joined-up thinking between different sections of government. Rather than forming consistent positions across all departments, they work at different speeds. This leaves us with a situation whereby the Foreign Minister is strongly criticising the regime in Zimbabwe for their blatant human rights violations, whilst at the same time the immigration services are alleging that it does not present a threat to its own citizens.
Secondly, it demonstrates the malign influence that political interfering can have. Sadly, our politicians (from all the parties) are wont to respond to the demands of the tabloids, and there is still strong anti-immigration feelings through the disgusting and deliberate misuse of the terms 'asylum seeker' and 'refugee' which have negated their important legal meanings. With a credit crunch in full swing, immigrants, regardless of why they are here, present an easy target and political parties can be very guilty of responding to these pressures. Therefore, rather than responding to the facts on the ground, they remain 'tough' on immigration, despite the destitution that this can cause.
There is no doubt that Zimbabwe is a disaster zone at the moment and that Mugabe and the Zanu-PF remain the dominant and dangerous controlling influence in the country. For any governmental body to argue otherwise is a failure in its responsibility to protect vulnerable people.
Post a Comment