| The best Zimbabwe news site on the world wide web |  |
| NEWS |
| FORUMS |
| NEWS ANALYSIS |
| READERS' FORUM |
Britain can deport Zimbabwean asylum seekers
By
Staff Reporter
JOHN Reid, the British Home Office Minister on Wednesday won the right
to deport failed Zimbabwean asylum seekers.
The Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (AIT) ruled that failed asylum seekers did not face an automatic "real risk of being subjected to persecution or serious ill-treatment".
The tribunal's decision focused on whether Zimbabweans returned to Robert Mugabe's regime would face torture or ill-treatment.
A Home Office spokeswoman said enforced deportations to Zimbabwe may now resume within weeks.
Last October the AIT threw the Government's policy into doubt after a failed asylum seeker, who can be identified only as AA, won his appeal against the Home Secretary.
But that decision has been reconsidered after the Court of Appeal ruled in April that the AIT had "erred in law" in making its initial decision.
Approximately 300 Zimbabweans were returned to the country, not all forcibly, before the AIT effectively halted all removals last October.
The decision was met with disapproval by Zimbabwean human rights activists who say the UK government is displaying double standards by condemning Mugabe's regime as "rotten", while sending asylum seekers back to meet an unknown fate.
Speaking after the ruling, Kate Hoey MP, chairman of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Zimbabwe said:
“This decision makes it all the more urgent that the political crisis in Zimbabwe is addressed by the international community. The leaders of the African Union should take the lead in protecting Zimbabweans; so far they only seem to have taken the lead in protecting Robert Mugabe.
“Many Zimbabwe asylum cases will now have to be re-opened. The United Kingdom has a responsibility under the 1951 Refugee Convention to ensure that asylum seekers returned to their country of origin will not be in danger."
She added: “Dodgy lawyers and the absolute chaos and corruption at the Home Office mean that many applications dating back several years have never been properly examined. A lot of the decisions made were very unreliable.
“The UK Government has an obligation to ensure that all these cases receive careful consideration and legal representation worthy of our tradition of justice.
“We need a system that gives refuge to people at risk of persecution from the Zimbabwean regime. Of course others will have to be returned home, we don’t want a law that says if Mugabe’s cronies turn up at Heathrow and claim asylum they should be allowed to stay indefinitely.”
The Zimbabwe government immediately seized on the decision and claimed it was a propaganda coup against Britain. It said the decision proved that UK government claims of human rights abuses in the Southern African country were "distortions".
Bright Matonga, Zimbabwe's Deputy Information Minister told New Zimbabwe.com by telephone from Harare that they would assist deportees to resettle in their communities.
Said Matonga: "Britain has been claiming that it is the champion of human rights and inviting Zimbabweans to come and settle there. Now it's not only the asylum seekers they don't want, but the nurses too.
"It is a shame that our people have had to learn the hard way and be used in British propaganda...Britain was only interested in gaining political mileage, and they have realised their efforts were in vain. Zimbabwe has always been a safe country.
"Their (UK government) actions are deplorable really, they have displayed a shocking level of hypocrisy. However, all Zimbabweans are free to come home, we will give them land and houses. We understand their plight."
Matonga said the government, through the Ministry of Labour, was ready to help failed asylum seekers find jobs, but observed that "some may be embarrassed that they sold their properties and could be wondering how to start all over again".
Zimbabwe government claims that deported asylum seekers would be looked after well were dealt with during the hearing. Professor Terence Ranger, an expert on Zimbabwe and emeritus professor of race relations and African history at Oxford University, told the tribunal hearing last month that concerns still remain about the safety of deporting failed asylum seekers to the country.
Asked about a statement made in April by Didymus Mutasa, the minister responsible for the feared Central Intelligence Organisation, that Zimbabweans returning to their country would be "looked after very well", Professor Ranger said: "I do not find it credible. His statement stands completely alone and has no context in previous material."
In a statement after the verdict, Liam Byrne, the British Immigration Minister, said he was "pleased" because the verdict enabled the government to uphold "a robust and fair system".
"We recognise that there are Zimbabweans who are in genuine fear of persecution and that is why we have granted them asylum - but it is only right that we remove those who seek to abuse our hospitality," he said.
"I am therefore pleased that the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal has today backed us and said that the involuntary return of failed asylum seekers to Zimbabwe does not put them at risk of mistreatment. We have argued this consistently during the last year.
"We would always encourage individuals to return of their own accord, as 90 Zimbabweans have already this year, but where people do not leave voluntarily it is only right that we enforce their return."
Despite leaving open the possibility of deportations to Zimbabwe, the judge did set out a number of caveats on his ruling which could lead deportees to be at risk.
Deportees linked with Zimbabwean opposition parties or with military or criminal records may be at greater danger of serious mistreatment during interrogation by Zimbabwean authorities, the ruling said.
The six-page document added: "If the reason for suspicion is that the deportee has a political profile considered to be adverse to the Zimbabwean regime, that is likely to be sufficient to give rise to a real risk of persecutory ill-treatment for a reason that is recognised by the Refugee Convention.
"That will not necessarily be the case where the only matter of interest is a relevant military history or outstanding criminal issues.
"Each case must be considered on its particular facts."
Currently, about 14 Zimbabweans are in immigration detention pending deportation. It is unknown how many of that number are failed asylum seekers or prisoners awaiting removal from Britain.
At least 15 000 Zimbabweans applied for asylum between 2000 and 2005. An estimated 7,000 had their asylum claims rejected. In the first three months of this year, there were 755 new asylum applications from Zimbabwe.
On the steps of the court, the Zimbabweans who had come to hear the ruling declared their disappointment.
Arthur Molife, a Zimbabwean who already has leave to remain in the UK, told the two dozen who had turned out to support the case: "The Zimbabweans have lost here today. It hurts. If you people are serious, take it up on the British streets today. I have got my papers but I feel the pain for others."
Mafungasei Maikokera, 25, said she feared she would be sent back to Zimbabwe and persecuted. She arrived in the UK in 2002. After being detained for seven months, her application for asylum was rejected. Visibly anxious, Maikokera said: "I was expecting something better from the decision here that would allow us to sleep peacefully. Instead we have nightmares. Not knowing is torture in itself."
Patricia Mukandara, 27, who had lived in the UK for five years before the immigration service detained her for seven months, said her case was due to be heard at the High Court.
She told the crowd, who held banners declaring "Sent to Zimbabwe, sent to death" as they sang on the court steps, "Justice has not been done. Let's fight for each other."
Sir Andrew Green, the chairman of the Migrationwatch think-tank, which campaigns against mass immigration, said: "This is a most welcome decision. The courts have at last returned to common sense. These cases can only be decided individually. A blanket ban on removals is an open invitation to bogus claimants."
David Davis, the
Shadow Home Secretary, said: "This whole situation is due to the
Government’s failure of policy in Zimbabwe. It demonstrates the
need for a better analysis of the situation in Zimbabwe including the
fate of deportees. We called for this twelve months ago, but the Government
has failed to act."
JOIN THE DEBATE
ON THIS ARTICLE ON THE NEWZIMBABWE.COM FORUMS
newsdesk@newzimbabwe.com
All material copyright newzimbabwe.com
Material may be published or reproduced in any form with appropriate credit to this website