This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/feb/28/border-agency-tamils-sri-lanka
The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 2 | Version 3 |
|---|---|
| Court stops Tamil asylum seekers being sent back to Sri Lanka | Court stops Tamil asylum seekers being sent back to Sri Lanka |
| (about 1 month later) | |
| The UK Border Agency has been ordered to completely halt the removal of Tamils who have been refused asylum, pending an assessment of the risk such individuals face on return to Sri Lanka. | The UK Border Agency has been ordered to completely halt the removal of Tamils who have been refused asylum, pending an assessment of the risk such individuals face on return to Sri Lanka. |
| The high court decision came on Wednesday, 24 hours before 65 people – mostly Tamil and mostly unsuccessful asylum seekers – were due to be removed on a charter flight to Sri Lanka. The court ruled that it would be wrong to deport them when an immigration tribunal was in the process of updating its country guidance for Sri Lanka. The assessment, designed to assist immigration judges, is not expected until late April or early May. | The high court decision came on Wednesday, 24 hours before 65 people – mostly Tamil and mostly unsuccessful asylum seekers – were due to be removed on a charter flight to Sri Lanka. The court ruled that it would be wrong to deport them when an immigration tribunal was in the process of updating its country guidance for Sri Lanka. The assessment, designed to assist immigration judges, is not expected until late April or early May. |
| Sitting in the high court, Mr Justice Wilkie sitting with Judge Gleeson said it would be wrong to allow the removal of Tamil asylum seekers by charter flight "at the very time that the upper tribunal [immigration and asylum chamber] is actively seized with considering new country guidance, at a time when it is clear from the agenda that the UTIAC is considering the matter virtually afresh and where it is accepted by the SSHD [home secretary] through the preliminary closing submissions that the existing country guidance case will have to change". | Sitting in the high court, Mr Justice Wilkie sitting with Judge Gleeson said it would be wrong to allow the removal of Tamil asylum seekers by charter flight "at the very time that the upper tribunal [immigration and asylum chamber] is actively seized with considering new country guidance, at a time when it is clear from the agenda that the UTIAC is considering the matter virtually afresh and where it is accepted by the SSHD [home secretary] through the preliminary closing submissions that the existing country guidance case will have to change". |
| "That position is one which this court cannot simply blind itself to," he said. | "That position is one which this court cannot simply blind itself to," he said. |
| The Border Agency (UKBA) was granted leave to appeal against the order staying removals and is expected to challenge it in the court of appeal on Thursday. A UKBA spokeswoman said: "We are disappointed with the outcome of this hearing and we will appeal. The ruling does not represent a blanket ban on returns to Sri Lanka." | The Border Agency (UKBA) was granted leave to appeal against the order staying removals and is expected to challenge it in the court of appeal on Thursday. A UKBA spokeswoman said: "We are disappointed with the outcome of this hearing and we will appeal. The ruling does not represent a blanket ban on returns to Sri Lanka." |
| But, unless the court of appeal issues a new order allowing the removals, the charter flight due to leave at 4pm on Thursday, which would be the ninth removing Tamils in under two years, will not go ahead. | But, unless the court of appeal issues a new order allowing the removals, the charter flight due to leave at 4pm on Thursday, which would be the ninth removing Tamils in under two years, will not go ahead. |
| The high court was also presented with evidence contained in a Human Rights Watch report published on Tuesday, alleging that Sri Lankan security forces have been using rape and other forms of sexual violence to torture suspected members or supporters of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). The report said that "while widespread rape in custody occurred during the armed conflict that ended in May 2009 … politically motivated sexual violence by the military and police continues to the present". | The high court was also presented with evidence contained in a Human Rights Watch report published on Tuesday, alleging that Sri Lankan security forces have been using rape and other forms of sexual violence to torture suspected members or supporters of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE). The report said that "while widespread rape in custody occurred during the armed conflict that ended in May 2009 … politically motivated sexual violence by the military and police continues to the present". |
| Additionally, the court heard about the response, earlier this month, to a freedom of information (FoI) request to the Home Office, which revealed that between the end of the island's civil war in 2009 and September 2012 15 failed asylum seekers managed to escape back to Britain after being removed by the UKBA and subsequently won refugee status after giving evidence to officials saying they were tortured in Sri Lanka. | Additionally, the court heard about the response, earlier this month, to a freedom of information (FoI) request to the Home Office, which revealed that between the end of the island's civil war in 2009 and September 2012 15 failed asylum seekers managed to escape back to Britain after being removed by the UKBA and subsequently won refugee status after giving evidence to officials saying they were tortured in Sri Lanka. |
| Keith Best, chief executive of Freedom from Torture, who filed the FoI request with the Home Office, welcomed Wednesday's judgment. "In the face of such overwhelming evidence, it is a sad indictment of our political masters that it has taken a court to impose the precautions that we have repeatedly called for," he said. "The UKBA's removals policy for Sri Lankan Tamils remains deeply flawed. Until this is remedied many in need of the UK's protection still live with the risk of forced return to torture." | Keith Best, chief executive of Freedom from Torture, who filed the FoI request with the Home Office, welcomed Wednesday's judgment. "In the face of such overwhelming evidence, it is a sad indictment of our political masters that it has taken a court to impose the precautions that we have repeatedly called for," he said. "The UKBA's removals policy for Sri Lankan Tamils remains deeply flawed. Until this is remedied many in need of the UK's protection still live with the risk of forced return to torture." |
| The existing guidance on Sri Lanka dates from 2009. The UTIAC has heard evidence not only of Tamils who are unsuccessful asylum seekers being tortured on their return but also of Tamils who are UK citizens being detained when visiting Sri Lanka. | The existing guidance on Sri Lanka dates from 2009. The UTIAC has heard evidence not only of Tamils who are unsuccessful asylum seekers being tortured on their return but also of Tamils who are UK citizens being detained when visiting Sri Lanka. |
| Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. | |
| Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. Enter your email address to subscribe. |