Law against asylum seekers may have public health impact

The first effects of the implementation of the widely criticised section 55 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 were reported by health services in east Kent this week.

Dr Peter Le Feuvre, a GP in Dover, has criticised the new asylum rules as “grossly inhumane”

TESSA NEWMARK

So far 36 asylum seekers in the area who applied for asylum after having arrived in the United Kingdom, as opposed to applying at the port of entry, have been denied benefit support and accommodation, under new government plans to get tough on asylum seekers. The number of asylum seekers presenting to services as destitute is rising by the day, say health service representatives in East Kent.

“As of eight days ago we have noted a sharp rise in cases of asylum seekers who have been refused social support from the Home Office's National Asylum Support Service,” said Dr Peter Le Feuvre, a GP in Dover. “They are still allowed to go on and claim political asylum, but they are being given seven day eviction notices from the Home Office accommodation centres, so they have no money and nowhere to live while they do this. It appears that there are no appeals to these decisions.

“One of my patients affected by this is most certainly a victim of torture—the whipping marks were obvious. He had spent two periods in prison in Angola, during which he was branded with a hot iron and put in a hole with biting ants. He claimed asylum three days after arrival in the United Kingdom. The fact that this man is now facing the prospect of sleeping on a park bench in Dover beggars belief. It is grossly inhumane,” he added.

A High Court challenge by refugee groups to the initial legislation in April 2003 resulted in the Home Office being ordered to make the decision process for support fairer and more reasonable, but nothing has yet happened.

The Home office is still legally allowed to send out letters denying people support and the responsibility now lies with legal representatives to prove that a person is not mentally fit to be denied accommodation and financial support during the asylum claim process. The legal representative has to show that the Home Office is, in some way, breaching the Human Rights Act in the case of specific individuals. Only in those cases, can they get their in-country support reinstated.

Asylum seekers at a Home Office induction centre in Margate

TESSA NEWMARK

Refugee organisations insist that asylum seekers are at risk of being made destitute by section 55. The National Asylum Support Service has claimed that implementation of section 55 could affect up to 100 asylum seekers across the United Kingdom every day.

In response to this week's allegations a Home Office spokesman said that there would undoubtedly be some problems in the short term. “We are tackling widespread abuse of our asylum system. It is not acceptable for people to claim asylum after being in the UK for weeks or months,” he said. “We will make a decision on their claim quickly… but in the meantime we will expect them to continue to support themselves.”

According to the latest Home Office data about 111 000 people claimed political asylum in 2002, the highest number on record. Applications fell in the first three months of this year, however, following the closure of the Sangatte Red Cross refugee camp near Calais, increased security at ports and airports, and the naming of 17 countries from which asylum seekers would not be accepted. More than half of the claims last year came from people who had claimed asylum once already in the country.

Dr Le Feuvre says that the new policy will undoubtedly have health implications for asylum seekers across the country. “I can't even give them a prescription for the medicines they need, as they have no money to pay the pharmacist. This is, in effect, denying these people access to appropriate medical care.”

On arrival many asylum seekers need basic treatment for minor ailments, often a result of long journeys in poor conditions on the backs of lorries, he added. They are often stressed and exhausted and need to restart treatments they were taking in their home countries. Forty per cent of all asylum seekers are known to have psychological problems.

Dr Le Feuvre's views are echoed by Ms Ali Chambers, of the Migrant Helpline, Dover. “This new legislation is being implemented in a harsh and draconian way all over the country now. These people have done nothing wrong and may well go on to get positive asylum decisions to stay in the United Kingdom as refugees,” she said.

“We are in a ridiculous situation in which the onus is on health services and the legal representatives of these asylum seekers to prove that these people, since becoming destitute, are suffering as a result… [and] that to continue to deny them support breaches human rights law.”

Dr Le Feuvre said, “I'm now involved in making a professional judgment as to whether one Somali lady is ‘mentally fit’ to be denied access to emergency accommodation, food, and basic funds while she claims asylum in Britain. She applied for asylum four days after arrival through Heathrow airport, at the request of the trafficker, who won't want to be identified as he accompanied her through passport control. This is a very common scenario.”

The BMA has this week written to the government asking for clarification of details regarding implementation of section 55. A spokesperson told the BMJ that the association expressed deep concern “about the public health and humanitarian impact of any policy that left a vulnerable group of people both homeless and destitute.”