|
Letter to the Chief Adjudicatorof the Immigration Appeals Authority from BWRAP & WAR Judge Henry Hodge 28 December 2001 Dear Judge Hodge, We urge you to take immediate action against Adjudicators severely restricting time allowed for gathering expert reports for appeal hearings. The fact that women who have been raped, and other victims of torture, may not be able to gather such evidence in the limited time available has immediate implications for whether or not the full facts are being put before the authorities considering their asylum claims. Although there are no official statistics, it is estimated that at least 50% of women claiming asylum have been raped. When such information is not available to those determining their claims, women’s lives are endangered. We are regularly commissioned by lawyers to interview women claiming asylum who report rape and other sexual violence, usually by police or army. On the basis of our interview, we document women’s experiences and assess whether their symptoms confirm they have suffered such violence. You will appreciate that describing and re-living traumatic experiences is often a deeply painful process for victims and inevitably involves painstaking and careful work which is very time-consuming. Yet the time allowed for reports is increasingly shortened by Adjudicators, with the result that it is becoming practically impossible for us to provide reports in time. Because rape is such an intensely personal and traumatic violation, it is widely acknowledged how difficult it is for women to speak about it to anyone, especially to men in positions of authority who may be reminiscent of the officials who raped them. As a result, many women claiming asylum do not disclose rape when interviewed by officials, or to lawyers. Some women cannot speak about rape they have suffered for several years. Our reports are therefore vital in ensuring that decision-makers are informed of the full extent of the violence victims have suffered. They have been widely accepted by Adjudicators, the Immigration Appeals Tribunal and in a precedent-setting case in the High Court, acknowledging the difficulties victims experience in speaking about rape, even many years after the event (R v SSHD ex parte Ejon, QBD 1998 INLR95). We are small organisations with very limited staff and always aim to provide thorough reports within the required time limits. However, the pressure of time now being imposed may mean that women who are already traumatised and vulnerable will be forced to proceed with their claim without a report. We draw your attention to the IAA’s own Asylum Gender Guidelines, which state: "Thus judiciary should consider whether the procedures which they adopt facilitate and encourage full disclosure by the asylum seeker" (Section 5 Procedural and evidential issues). To press ahead with an Appeal Hearing, without allowing time for the applicant to speak in confidence and for expert evidence to be prepared, clearly contravenes these guidelines. As you will no doubt be aware, legal representatives invariably use the failure to allow time for the gathering of evidence as the basis of an appeal to the Immigration Appeals Tribunal and possibly for Judicial Review proceedings. In addition, frequently even when an adjournment is granted, it only allows a further month or so in which to obtain a report - not enough time to make a report a realistic possibility. We are told by lawyers that it is fairly common for their request for more time to be refused before the hearing date set, but that on the day itself the Adjudicator is likely to grant a further adjournment. In a context where asylum seekers are often accused of being a "drain" on public funds, this waste of court time and money is likely to fuel such prejudices. In our experience, not all lawyers vigorously pursue their client’s entitlement to a report. Many have told us that they proceed without one, fearing Adjudicators will not agree to the length of adjournment which would be necessary. Is the intended effect of unreasonably tight deadlines to dismiss any woman who has the misfortune of being represented by a less determined or experienced lawyer? Since it is widely acknowledged that victims of rape and other sexual violence need time and a sympathetic environment in order to speak about their ordeals, why are asylum seekers expected to report under less favourable circumstances? Women reporting rape in other countries who claim asylum here must receive the same standard of treatment as women reporting rape in the UK expect to receive. Either the full information of what women have suffered will not be available, or they will be forced to try to speak about what has happened for the first time in court without their legal representatives being fully aware of their situation - which can result in further distress and injustice. In a recent case a woman burst into tears after she began to speak about the rape she had gone through. The Adjudicator who had no previous knowledge that rape was an issue in the case, insisted she carry on. The case went to the Tribunal, which ruled that the way it had been conducted was unacceptable. To press ahead with a hearing without the benefit of this evidence cannot be tolerated. It is not only traumatic and brutal, but potentially life-threatening, as women are left vulnerable to possible return to further rape and other violence and persecution. Given the urgency of the situation outlined, please let us know what instruction you will give to Adjudicators to allow sufficient time for reports commissioned on behalf of victims of rape, sexual violence and other torture. You will be aware of widespread public concern that the conduct of asylum claims must be fair, and seen to be fair. We would appreciate hearing from you as a matter of priority. We look forward to hearing from you. Yours sincerely, Cristel Amiss Anne Neale cc David Blunkett MP, Home Secretary PS: Please find attached our response to amendments proposed by the Lord Chancellor’s Department to the Immigration and Asylum Appeals procedures. We would appreciate your comments on the issues we raise about the IAA. |