Home Newsletter

JRS UK News, September 2003


A Sore Trial 

Yarl’s Wood Immigration detention Centre, designed to hold 900 men, women and children, at a cost of £100 million, opened on 1st November 2001.  Lord Rooker, one of a succession of ministers responsible for immigration, said that detention centres would house only those who were to be promptly removed from the country.  In fact in February 2002 only 46 out of the 385 detainees then at Yarl’s Wood had received removal orders.  Several had already spent months in prisons, victims of the double anxiety: how long would detention last and would they be sent back? 

The Centre was run by Group 4, whose Detention Custody Officers were paid £6.95/hour and received only a few weeks training.  During several of my visits the officers had difficulty in locating the men I’d come to see and then objected when two of them sat at the same table.  There were tales of endless roll-calls, locked doors, unnecessary use of handcuffs, shouting, shortage of money, difficulties with telephones, hunger strikes.  Not a happy place. 

On the night of 14th February 2002 55 year old Eunice, who had already been refused medical treatment, was prevented from going to the chapel.  She became so excited that 4 Detention Custody Officers had to pin her down.  Male detainees saw the incident  through a window and reacted violently.  A fire broke out in a building:

·                made of timber with panels of polyurofoam;

·                in which there was no sprinkler system;

·                and in which there had never been a fire drill.

Detainees had to smash reinforced windows to get out.  A nurse trapped in the building only escaped by phoning relatives who informed the police.  Most of the detainees lost all their possessions: precious documents, address books, clothes, photos, cash and jewellery.  After spending many hours in the cold of a February night some were roughly handled by the police and then placed in segregation, where food was thrown through the doors and where they were confined without exercise for several days.  At the end of March 2002 Yarl’s Wood closed, because it was impossible to obtain insurance. 

On 14th April 2002, 13 detainees were charged with arson, violent disorder and affray.  They were remanded in custody in such prisons as Norwich, Bullingdon, Feltham, Bedford and Wormwood Scrubs.  The trial began at Harrow Crown Court in April 2003.  By that time several had obtained bail and two had absconded.  Because evidence from closed circuit televisions was non-existent, everything depended on the testimony of Group 4 officers, whose displays of photos, counselling sessions, name swapping and witness coaching by a firm of doubtful repute led the Prosecution to remark that the investigation was rough and ready.  In spite of an Early Day Motion signed by 100 MPs, a letter to David Blunkett from Amnesty International and a promise from the Minister several witnesses for the defence were removed from the UK.  

The trial lasted for 4 months at the end of which:  no one was convicted of arson. 

BL and HM were found guilty of violent disorder and sentenced to 4 years, which they are now serving in Wormwood Scrubs.  They are intending to appeal which could take a year or more. 

AA pleaded guilty to violent disorder at an early stage.  Having already spent so long in prison he was considered to have completed his sentence, but Immigration have repeatedly denied him bail and kept him locked up in Wormwood Scrubs, from which there is little prospect of early release.    

NM, only 19 at the time of the fire and kept in prison since then, pleaded guilty to affray, was sentenced to 3 months, which he had more than completed.  He was immediately re-arrested, sent first to Woodhill maximum security prison and then on to Lindholme, a detention centre near Doncaster run by the prison service. 

KG, held in prison for 11 months until the arson charge was dropped before the trial.  When his violent disorder charge was dropped early on in the trial, he was immediately re-arrested, driven around for 4 hours so that he could not contact his solicitor, then removed to Albania in the clothes he stood up in. 

All the others were acquitted.  P – lucky man! – had Exceptional Leave to Remain, but the others were all re-arrested and detained.  A detention centre placed A in segregation, because it was wrongly thought that he was guilty of violent disorder.  AK was held  in police cells for 4 days before being sent to Woodhill, who understandably thought he was a convicted prisoner.  Eventually all were granted bail, but their future remains uncertain. 

The Prosecuting Counsel said of Group 4:  “Group 4 have been a national laughing stock ever since they first blundered into the field of private custodial services.  You may wonder whether any large commercial organisation could have made a bigger fool of themselves even if they had been deliberately trying to do so.” (28th July 2003)

Yarl’s Wood is re-opening on the 28th September and Group 4 are recruiting staff.  No experience is required.  Would any of our readers like to apply?

Jock Earle SJ 

Clear Up! Campaign 

The US and British military action in Iraq might officially be over, but the killing and maiming have not stopped. Reports are now coming in of children killed and injured by cluster bomblets that have been left lying on the ground near their homes.  

In the two years after Operation Desert Storm in 1991, unexploded cluster bomblets killed 1,600 Iraqi civilians and injured another 2,500. A proportion of cluster bomblets - the military says 5%, in reality it is often higher - fail to detonate on impact. They are then left on the ground with other unexploded ordinance after conflict, becoming indiscriminate weapons waiting to be detonated by their victims. 

Cluster bomblets are more lethal than landmines and children figure higher among their victims, yet unlike landmines they are not covered by any international humanitarian law. That is why Landmine Action, a campaigning coalition of which the Jesuit Refugee Service is a member, has launched its Clear Up! Campaign. It is calling for a freeze on their use until new international law can be negotiated that compels users to clear up the lethal mess of bomblets and other explosive remnants of war after conflict. To sign the petition, go to www.clearup.org

Anne Quesney, Landmine Action   

Reflection

It Is High Time We Decided

Oh my people
Why all the loud cries
Why the guns and bombs
Why destroy the land, the innocent souls
Why the division
Oh my people.
 

Oh my people
When shall we unite?
When shall we decide "we want peace"
Oh yes, it is high time we decided
Oh my people.
 

Oh my people
It is very easy to cry and blame
It is very easy to talk of disunity, injustice and oppression
It is very easy to sign peace agreements
It is very easy, easy, easy…
Oh my people.
 

Oh my people
Who is the enemy?
Who is to call off the war?
Who is to sow peace?
Who is to restore the dignity, the hope and the lost love?
Oh my people.
 

It is high time we decide from our hearts. 

(Frances Philippa, Jesuit Refugee Service Uganda.  Frances is of Sudanese origin and lives in Uganda.)

PUT PEOPLE FIRST – NOT BUDGETS 

Proposals to impose time limits on publicly funded advice for asylum seekers are harsh.  They will place undue burdens on immigration legal practitioners.  

Responding to a Consultation Paper from the Department for Constitutional Affairs, JRS UK says there is already a shortage of legal advisers who are publicly or charitably funded in England and Wales. It predicts that lawyers will abandon cases involving asylum seekers and switch to more lucrative areas of the law if proposed changes to limit public funding to 5 hours at initial case and 4 hours at appeal are implemented.

The JRS response to the consultation calls on the Home Office to review the entire asylum process, putting the individual asylum seeker’s needs and protection first. “Once the process has been put right, then there will be fewer appeals and considerably fewer costs to the public purse,” it argues. “It seems unduly hard that asylum seekers be forced to pay the price of the budget overspend through a decreased chance of getting legal advice in their cases, and the likely decrease in standards of care taken by legal advisers”.

 The full response can be downloaded here Legal Aid Consultation.

Louise Zanre

 

Back to top