Power of detain- Immigration act 1971

The burden is on SSHD

High Standard of proof

Article 5(1) of the Convention provides as follows:

"Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be deprived of his liberty save in the following cases and in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law:

…

(f) the lawful arrest or detention of a person to prevent his effecting an unauthorised entry into the country or of a person against whom action is being taken with a view to deportation or extradition.

Operation Enforcement Manual

S & Ors v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2007] EWHC 1654 (Admin) (18 July 2007) Mr Justice Wyn Williams stated:

Policy

14. It is common ground that before October 2001 the Defendant's policy was that families with children could only be detained in exceptional circumstances and for a few days under Immigration Act powers. That policy was set out in the White Paper of July 1998 entitled "Firmer, Faster, Fairer". The Policy was encapsulated in the following quotation: -

    "The detention of families and children is particularly regrettable, but is also sometimes necessary to effect the removal of those who have no authority to remain in the UK, and who refuse to leave voluntarily. Such detention should be planned to be effected as close to removal as possible so as to ensure that families are not normally detained for more than a few days."

15. In February 2002 the White Paper entitled "Secure Borders, Safe Haven" was published. It is also common ground that this White Paper signalled a shift in policy. In paragraph 4.77 of the Paper the following appeared:

    "Families can in some instances give rise to the same problem of non-compliance and thus the need to detain as can be encountered with single adults. Naturally there are particular concerns about detaining families and it is not a step to be taken lightly. Although true of all decisions to detain, it is especially important in the case of families that detention should be used only when necessary and should not be for an excessive period. It was previously the case that families would, other than as part of the fast-track process at Oackington Reception Centre, normally be detained only in order to effect removal. Such detention would be planned to take place as close to removal as possible so as to ensure that families were not normally detained for more than a few days. Whilst this covered most circumstances where detention of a family might be necessary, it did not allow for those occasions when it is justifiable to detain families at other times or for longer than just a few days. Accordingly, families may, where necessary, now be detained at other times and for longer periods than just immediately prior to removal. This could be whilst their identities and basis of claim are established, or because there is a reasonable belief that they would abscond. Where families are detained they are held in dedicated family accommodation based on family rooms in Removal Centres. No family is detained simply because suitable accommodation is available."

16. Government Policy on the detention of families with children was the subject of debate in the House of Commons on 8^th May 2003. During the course of that debate the then Minister for Citizenship and Immigration, Beverley Hughes MP, summarised Home Office Policy in relation to the detention of minors. She said:

    "I welcome the opportunity to put on record the Government's policy and practice on the issues [concerning the detention of asylum seeking families and children]……..

    My Hon. Friend is right to say that, prior to October 2001, families with children were detained under those powers [the Immigration Act 1971] but, as a matter of policy rather than law using qualified detention criteria that meant that families would be detained only to go through the Oakington fast-track asylum process or for one or two days immediately prior to removal. He is also right to say that in October 2001, it was decided to remove this qualification and to allow for the detention of families under the same detention criteria as others. That was done in recognition of the fact that families – or the adults in families, anyway – can give rise to the same concerns as single adults, in terms of absconding or frustrating removal.

    …………..

    I entirely reject my Hon. Friend's assertion that families are targeted for detention or that they are detained except in the most exceptional circumstances or for the shortest periods of time……..

    I am deeply sympathetic to the concerns about the detention of children. It is not something we do easily or gladly and it is certainly not our intention – or our practice – that children should be in detention for prolonged periods………."

17. In a debate in the House of Lords on 18^th May 2004 Lord Bassam of Brighton also summarised "general government policy with regards to children". He said: -

    "However, as we have made plain on many occasions, it is a regrettable fact that some families with children can give rise to the same immigration and asylum concerns as single adults, particularly in terms of failing to leave the UK voluntarily when they have no lawful basis of stay here. The detention of some families may therefore sometimes be necessary as part of maintaining an effective immigration control and asylum system. We cannot exclude families with children from those controls.

    Having said that, I must stress that overall very few families are detained and that most of those who are detained are held very briefly just prior to their removal from the UK. There is a presumption in all cases in favour of granting temporary admission or release, and each case will always be considered on its merits."

Nadarajah & amirthanathan v SSHD [2003]EWCA Civ 1768- Detention was unlwafull , breach of article 5 ECHR

.Para ( 16) (1) Schedule 2.1971 act- Power to detain.

Article 5 ECHR - when a detentin is lawful

Detention Centre Rules 2001

unjust treatment

'Air rage' lets asylum seekers stay in UK

FAILED asylum seekers dodge deportation by starting FIGHTS on ...

Deportation appeal fails

Read JCWI's response to the Home Office consultation

UK -Government wins landmark terror deportation ruling on Islamist ...

Yusuf v SSHD 2005 EWCA Civ 1554- Removal directions

Nv SSHD 2006 Civ 299- Deportation order

Jamaican mother of war veterans faces deportation from the UK

Radical cleric loses appeal against UK deportation

The Immigration (Notices) (Amendment) Regulations 2006 will come into force on 31 August 2006.

The Regulations allow the Home Office to specify more than one country or territory of proposed removal in the notice of immigration decision. This will occur if an applicant is entitled to live in more than one country or where there is a dispute as to which country the person should be removed. This may occur where the application holds a passport of one country but is also entitled to live in another.

The UK Home Office has announced changes to the way in which it handles legal challenges in cases where people are about to be removed from the UK.

When a person has no leave to be in the UK, for example because they have entered illegally or because they have stayed longer than was permitted by the leave they were given, they may face removal from the UK. In such cases, a decision to remove them will be made. This decision can be challenged in limited circumstances, for example if the person asserts that to remove them from the UK would be a breach of their human rights.

Defend Halima and 1 year old Bailey Jr! - Wednesday 11th April

DON’T DEPORT THEM!

You might request the Duty Judges considering injunction applications to prevent the removal.

UK SIGNS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH LIBYA click here

According to the memorandum, similar to others signed with Jordan and Lebanon, deported suspects will be treated humanely

useful articles from www.doughtystreet.co.uk

Places of detention - Laura Dubinsky
Remedies for immigration detainees - Laura Dubinsky
Categorisation of foreign prisoners - Laura Dubinsky
Deportation - John Walsh
Finding the responsible IND department
Getting information
Invitation to join the Foreign National Prisoners Network.

• The First Minister has raised these concerns with the UK Home Office on a number of occasions. "Fiona Hyslop wrote to Liam Byrne two weeks ago about these ...Salmond in talks to force closure of Dungavel centre
• Pictures of Colnbrook Immigration Removal Centre, a secure site outside Heathrow Airport used to hold people being deported from the UK...In pictures: Immigration removal
  

A catalogue of racist behaviour inside Britain's immigration detention centres was exposed by an official report today.

Immigration offenders and failed asylum seekers at one centre, Colnbrook near Heathrow airport, were taunted by one female officer with: "Animals, lock-up time". ...Immigration centres accused of racism by official report

Building starts on new removal centre

Conditions worsen at UK asylum-seeker detention centres

. Court saves Malawian boy from UK deportation

UK court cites torture fear in ordering release of Libyans slated ...

Check UNHCR guidelines .

How we treat the desperate

http://pso.hmprisonservice.gov.uk/PSO_4630_immigration_and_foreign_nationals.doc

If you are liable to detention and deportation - you must

At all times carry the following information on your person

Full name

Date of birth

Home Office Reference number

Home Office Port Reference number

Same details for any family members

Phone number of your:

Solicitor including their emergency number

Your MP including their emergency number

Your doctor (if there are any persistent medical problems with any member of your family or yourself)