DOCSLIB.ORG

STATELESSNESS DETERMINATION in the UK a UNHCR Audit of the Home Office Approach to Decision-Making in the Statelessness Determination Procedure 2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
STATELESSNESS DETERMINATION in the UK a UNHCR Audit of the Home Office Approach to Decision-Making in the Statelessness Determination Procedure 2020 STATELESSNESS DETERMINATION IN THE UK A UNHCR audit of the Home Office approach to decision-making in the Statelessness Determination Procedure 2020 1 Cover image: © UNHCR/Greg Constantine 2 CONTENTS Glossary of Terms ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................................................................................................6 1.Introduction ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................16 1.1 UNHCR’s work on statelessness ...........................................................................................................................................................................16 1.2 UNHCR Quality Protection Partnership (QPP) ..................................................................................................................................................17 2. Legal framework ......................................................................................................................................................................................................18 2.1 International law .........................................................................................................................................................................................................18 2.2 UK law and policy on statelessness ...................................................................................................................................................................18 3. Methodology ............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 20 3.1 Scope of audit .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 20 3.2 Sampling of cases ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 20 4. Assessing and determining statelessness ..................................................................................................................................... 22 4.1 Burden of proof ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 22 4.1.1 Cases engaging the duty to assist ...................................................................................................................................................... 22 4.1.2 Provision of assistance due to applicant’s personal circumstances ........................................................................................24 4.1.3 The meaning of ‘reasonably available evidence’ .......................................................................................................................... 25 4.2 Standard of proof ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 26 4.2.1 Application of the standard of proof ................................................................................................................................................. 26 4.2.2 Lack of evidence and analysis of application of the standard of proof ................................................................................27 4.3 The credibility assessment ................................................................................................................................................................................... 29 4.3.1 Gathering the evidence ......................................................................................................................................................................... 29 4.3.2 Determining the material facts of the claim ....................................................................................................................................36 4.3.3 Assessing the credibility of each material fact ...............................................................................................................................37 4.3.4 Application of credibility indicators .....................................................................................................................................................41 4.3.5 A structured approach to decision-making .....................................................................................................................................42 5. Admissibility ...............................................................................................................................................................................................................44 5.1 Admissibility under UNHCR’s Handbook on protection of stateless persons ...................................................................................44 5.2 Home Office consideration of Palestinians as Stateless ...........................................................................................................................45 5.3 Home Office consideration of admissibility ...................................................................................................................................................46 6. General Grounds for Refusal .......................................................................................................................................................................49 6.1 Substantive consideration of statelessness .................................................................................................................................................. 50 6.2 Consideration of human rights grounds ......................................................................................................................................................... 52 7. Procedural considerations..............................................................................................................................................................................53 7.1 Interviews and written enquiries ........................................................................................................................................................................53 7.2 Speed of decisions on applications ................................................................................................................................................................ 56 7.3 Availability and impact of legal advice and representation .................................................................................................................... 58 7.4 Interpretation and translation services .............................................................................................................................................................61 7.5 Modern Slavery indicators .................................................................................................................................................................................. 62 7.6 Administrative Reviews .........................................................................................................................................................................................63 8. Immigration detention .......................................................................................................................................................................................67 9. Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................................................................................. 69 3 4 Image © UNHCR/Greg Constantine GLOSSARY OF TERMS AI ................................................................................................................................................................................ Asylum Instruction API ................................................................................................................................................................. Asylum Policy Instruction AR ........................................................................................................................................................................Administrative Review ‘2016 Home Office Policy’ ................Asylum Policy Instruction Statelessness and applications for leave to remain ‘2019 Home Office Policy’ ....................................................................... Home Office Stateless leave policy Version 3.0 AVR .............................................................................................................................................................Assisted Voluntary Return BGD
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Compatibility of the 1954 Convention Relating to the Status of Stateless Persons with Canada’S Legal Framework and Its International Human Rights Obligations
    ENDING STATELESSNESS STATELESSNESS ENDING Relating To e Status COMPATIBILITY Of Stateless Persons With Canada’s Legal OF THE Framework And Its International Human 1954 CONVENTION Rights Obligations A SPECIAL REPORT Ending STATELESSNESS W Y #IBELONG © United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, 2015 Researched And Written For UNHCR By Gregg Erauw ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ COMPATIBILITY OF THE 1954 CONVENTION RELATING TO THE STATUS OF STATELESS PERSONS WITH CANADA’S LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND ITS INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS OBLIGATIONS ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ RESEARCHED AND WRITTEN FOR UNHCR BY GREGG ERAUW © United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, 2015 The views expressed in this report are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the United Nations or UNHCR. COMPATIBILITY OF THE 1954 CONVENTION RELATING TO THE STATUS OF STATELESS PERSONS WITH CANADA’S LEGAL FRAMEWORK AND ITS INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS OBLIGATIONS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. 3 Background to the Report .................................................................................................................... 3 The Purpose of the
    [Show full text]
  • Immigration Consequences to a Charge of Simple Assault Or Battery Deborah Gonzalez Roger Williams University School of Law
    Roger Williams University DOCS@RWU Law Faculty Scholarship Law Faculty Scholarship 2-2013 Immigration Consequences to a Charge of Simple Assault or Battery Deborah Gonzalez Roger Williams University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: http://docs.rwu.edu/law_fac_fs Part of the Constitutional Law Commons, Criminal Law Commons, Immigration Law Commons, and the Supreme Court of the United States Commons Recommended Citation 61 RIBJ 21 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Faculty Scholarship at DOCS@RWU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Law Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of DOCS@RWU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Immigration Consequences to a Charge of Simple Assault or Battery It is never an easy task determining whether an offense of simple assault or battery/domestic in “alien’s” 1 misdemeanor crime of simple assault Rhode Island .4 or battery under RI Gen. Laws § 11-3-5 is an RI Gen. Laws § 11-5-3 states as follows: (a) aggravated felony, a crime of moral turpitude Except as otherwise provided in § 11-5-2, every or a domestic crime of violence according to person who shall make an assault or battery the Immigration Nationality Act. This article or both shall be imprisoned not exceeding one focuses solely on misdemeanor dispositions ,2 year or fined not exceeding one thousand dol - under RI Gen. Laws § 11-5-3/12-29-5, and how lars ($1,000), or both; (b) Where the provisions these dispositions are viewed in the immigration of "The Domestic Violence Prevention Act,” context, as well as the consequences a client may chapter 29 of title 12, are applicable, the penal - face based on a conviction or plea pursuant ties for violation of this section shall also to this statute.
    [Show full text]
  • Alien Removals and Returns: Overview and Trends
    Alien Removals and Returns: Overview and Trends Updated February 3, 2015 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R43892 Alien Removals and Returns: Overview and Trends Summary The ability to remove foreign nationals (aliens) who violate U.S. immigration law is central to the immigration enforcement system. Some lawful migrants violate the terms of their admittance, and some aliens enter the United States illegally, despite U.S. immigration laws and enforcement. In 2012, there were an estimated 11.4 million resident unauthorized aliens; estimates of other removable aliens, such as lawful permanent residents who commit crimes, are elusive. With total repatriations of over 600,000 people in FY2013—including about 440,000 formal removals—the removal and return of such aliens have become important policy issues for Congress, and key issues in recent debates about immigration reform. The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) provides broad authority to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) to remove certain foreign nationals from the United States, including unauthorized aliens (i.e., foreign nationals who enter without inspection, aliens who enter with fraudulent documents, and aliens who enter legally but overstay the terms of their temporary visas) and lawfully present foreign nationals who commit certain acts that make them removable. Any foreign national found to be inadmissible or deportable under the grounds specified in the INA may be ordered removed. The INA describes procedures for making and reviewing such a determination, and specifies conditions under which certain grounds of removal may be waived. DHS officials may exercise certain forms of discretion in pursuing removal orders, and certain removable aliens may be eligible for permanent or temporary relief from removal.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on the Situation of Human Rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran, Prepared by the Special Representative of the Commission on Human Rights, Mr
    UNITED NATIONS E Economic and Social Distr. GENERAL Council E/CN.4/1996/59 21 March 1996 ENGLISH ONLY COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS Fifty-second session Item 10 of the provisional agenda QUESTION OF THE VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS AND FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS IN ANY PART OF THE WORLD, WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO COLONIAL AND OTHER DEPENDENT COUNTRIES AND TERRITORIES Report on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran, prepared by the Special Representative of the Commission on Human Rights, Mr. Maurice Copithorne (Canada), pursuant to Commission resolution 1995/68 of 8 March 1995 and Economic and Social Council decision 1995/279 of 25 July 1995 CONTENTS Paragraphs Page I. INTRODUCTION................... 1- 26 4 A. Position of human rights in the world today . 3 - 6 4 B. Special Representative’s sources ...... 7- 10 5 C. Activities of the Special Representative . 11 - 16 6 D. Correspondence ............... 17- 18 7 E. Underlying questions ............ 19 7 F. Preliminary comments on the Special Representative’s visit to the Islamic Republic of Iran .......... 20- 26 8 GE.96-11290 (E) E/CN.4/1996/59 page 2 CONTENTS (continued) Paragraphs Page II. LEGAL SYSTEM................... 27- 57 9 A. Rights of an accused ............ 28- 29 9 B. Court system ................ 30- 35 10 C. Selection and training of judges ...... 36- 40 11 D. Clerical courts ............... 41 12 E. Punishments ................. 42- 50 13 F. Independent Bar Association ......... 51- 54 14 G. Atmosphere of the law ............ 55- 57 15 III. STATUS OF WOMEN ................. 58- 64 16 IV. THE FATWA AGAINST SALMAN RUSHDIE......... 65- 67 17 V.
    [Show full text]
  • Houses Built on Sand Ii
    i Houses built on sand ii Series editors: Simon Mabon, Edward Wastnidge and May Darwich After the Arab Uprisings and the ensuing fragmentation of regime– society relations across the Middle East, identities and geopolitics have become increasingly contested, with serious implications for the ordering of political life at domestic, regional and international levels, best seen in conflicts in Syria and Yemen. The Middle East is the most militarised region in the world, where geopolitical factors remain predominant in shaping political dynamics. Another common feature of the regional landscape is the continued degeneration of communal relations as societal actors retreat into substate identities, while difference becomes increasingly violent, spilling out beyond state borders. The power of religion – and trans- state nature of religious views and linkages – thus provides the means for regional actors (such as Saudi Arabia and Iran) to exert influence over a number of groups across the region and beyond. This series provides space for the engagement with these ideas and the broader political, legal and theological factors to create space for an intellectual reimagining of socio- political life in the Middle East. Originating from the SEPAD project (www.sepad.org.uk), this series facilitates the reimagining of political ideas, identities and organisation across the Middle East, moving beyond the exclusionary and binary forms of identity to reveal the contingent factors that shape and order life across the region. iii Houses built on sand Violence, sectarianism and revolution in the Middle East Simon Mabon Manchester University Press iv Copyright © Simon Mabon 2020 The right of Simon Mabon to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted by him in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.
    [Show full text]
  • Migrant Workers: Precarious and Unsupported
    Conseil canadien pour les réfugiés Canadian Council for Refugees Bill C-6 An Act to amend the Citizenship Act and to make consequential amendments to another Act Submission of the Canadian Council for Refugees April 2016 Canadian Council for Refugees Introduction The Canadian Council for Refugees welcomes the introduction of amendments to the Citizenship Act through Bill C-6, reversing many provisions of Bill C-24, the Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act that we opposed.1 The CCR also commends the new government for making this a priority piece of legislation. Bill C-6 provides an excellent opportunity to create an inclusive citizenship regime that promotes maximum civic participation and engagement. We need to bring down barriers to citizenship, especially for already disadvantaged groups such as refugees, the elderly, and women. In line with Canada’s international obligations, we encourage the government to craft a new citizenship regime to which all applicants will have equal access without discrimination. Canada has a legal obligation to facilitate access to citizenship for refugees: “The Contracting States shall as far as possible facilitate the assimilation and naturalization of refugees. They shall in particular make every effort to expedite naturalization proceedings and to reduce as far as possible the charges and costs of such proceedings.” (Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, Article 34). Access to nationality and citizenship is an important factor in the participation of newcomers in the political process. Participation in the political process, in turn, increases the sense of belonging and identification with the immigrants’ new country. At present, non-citizens in Canada are unable to vote in federal, provincial/territorial, and municipal elections.
    [Show full text]
  • Sabet and the Islamic Republic of Iran Nancy Amoury Combs William & Mary Law School, [email protected]
    College of William & Mary Law School William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository Faculty Publications Faculty and Deans 2000 On Children and Dual Nationality: Sabet and The Islamic Republic of Iran Nancy Amoury Combs William & Mary Law School, [email protected] Repository Citation Combs, Nancy Amoury, "On Children and Dual Nationality: Sabet and The slI amic Republic of Iran" (2000). Faculty Publications. 1045. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs/1045 Copyright c 2000 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/facpubs v. IRAN-UNITED STATES CLAIMS TRIBUNAL On Children and Dual Nationality: Sabet and The Islamic Republic ofIran Nancy Amoury Combs' Keywords: dual nationality, Iran-United States Claims Tribunal, minors, Abstract: The Iran-United States Claims Tribunal's recent decision in Sabet and The Islamic Republic of Iran sheds new light on difficult issues concerning the dual nationality of minors. In particular, the case was the first in which the Tribunal determined minor dual national claimants to have a dominant and effective nationality different from that of either of their parents. Further, the Tribunal broke new ground in its analysis of 'the caveat,' an equitable doctrine that can bar the claims of dual nationals. This article applauds the Tribunal's ad­ vances in its caveat jurisprudence and develops a new approach that would further those ad­ vances. 1. INTRODUCTION Before the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the Sabet family was among the wealthiest in Iran.! The patriarch of the family, Habib Sabet, was born to poverty but went on to establish.
    [Show full text]
  • Eid Al-Fitr Prayers in Al-Aqsa Mosque
    WWW.TEHRANTIMES.COM I N T E R N A T I O N A L D A I L Y 8 Pages Price 50,000 Rials 1.00 EURO 4.00 AED 43rd year No.13942 Saturday MAY 15, 2021 Ordibehesht 25, 1400 Shawwal 3, 1442 IRGC destroys Alekno invites NPC’s plan for Friday mosque of terrorist group 17 players to Iran diversifying petchem Damghan undergoes Page 2 for 2021 VNL Page 3 products underway Page 4 restoration Page 6 Rouhani calls on Muslim countries to defend Palestine TEHRAN – Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has urged Muslim countries to support the Palestinian people in the face of Israeli aggression. In a phone conversation with Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani on Thursday, the Iranian president under- lined the need for unity and cooperation See page 3 among Islamic countries in defending the Palestinian people. Continued on page 3 Development projects worth $1.47b inaugurated in free trade, special economic zones TEHRAN – President Hassan Rouhani on Thursday inaugurated numerous projects valued at 62 trillion rials (about $1.47 bil- lion) in the free trade and special economic zones of five different provinces across the country in an online event. Put into operation following the series of inaugurations started in the previous Iranian calendar year (ended on March 20), the said projects were based in the free trade and special economic zones of East Azarbaijan, Khuzestan, Alborz, Hormozgan, and Sis- tan-Baluchestan provinces. Continued on page 4 “That Day” chronicles Gen. Soleimani’s meeting with “The 23” crew Photo Illustration by Bahman Vakhshour TEHRAN – The Owj Arts and Media Organization has recently produced a documentary named “That Day” that gives images of Lieutenant-General Qa- ssem Soleimani’s meeting with the crew Tehran Times/ Tehran Times/ of the 2018 war drama “The 23”.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Naturalization Policy
    U.S. Naturalization Policy Updated May 3, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R43366 U.S. Naturalization Policy Summary Naturalization is the process that grants U.S. citizenship to lawful permanent residents (LPRs) who fulfill requirements established by Congress and enumerated in the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA). In general, U.S. immigration policy gives all LPRs the opportunity to naturalize, and doing so is voluntary. To qualify for citizenship, LPRs in most cases must have resided continuously in the United States for five years, show they possess good moral character, demonstrate English language ability, and pass a U.S. government and history examination, which is part of their naturalization interview. The INA waives some of these requirements for applicants over age 50 with 20 years of U.S. residency, those with mental or physical disabilities, and those who have served in the U.S. military. Naturalization is often viewed as a milestone for immigrants and a measure of their civic and socioeconomic integration to the United States. Naturalized immigrants gain important benefits, including the right to vote, security from deportation in most cases, access to certain public-sector jobs, and the ability to travel with a U.S. passport. U.S. citizens are also advantaged over LPRs for sponsoring relatives to immigrate to the United States. During the past three decades, the number of LPRs who submitted naturalization applications has varied over time, ranging from a low of about 207,000 applications in FY1991 to a high of 1.4 million in FY1997. In FY2020, 967,755 LPRs submitted naturalization applications.
    [Show full text]
  • Claims by Non-Citizens Under the Americans with Disabilities Act: Proper Extraterritorial Application in Torrico V
    Pace International Law Review Volume 17 Issue 1 Spring 2005 Article 6 April 2005 Claims by Non-Citizens under the Americans with Disabilities Act: Proper Extraterritorial Application in Torrico v. International Business Machines Michelle Shender Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/pilr Recommended Citation Michelle Shender, Claims by Non-Citizens under the Americans with Disabilities Act: Proper Extraterritorial Application in Torrico v. International Business Machines, 17 Pace Int'l L. Rev. 131 (2005) Available at: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/pilr/vol17/iss1/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Law at DigitalCommons@Pace. It has been accepted for inclusion in Pace International Law Review by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@Pace. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CASENOTE CLAIMS BY NON-CITIZENS UNDER THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT: PROPER EXTRATERRITORIAL APPLICATION IN TORRICO V. INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES Michelle Shendert I. Introduction ....................................... 131 II. History of ADA's Extraterritorial Application and the Law Today .................................... 134 III. Presentation of Case .............................. 144 IV . Analysis ........................................... 152 V . Conclusion ......................................... 157 I. INTRODUCTION The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C. §12101 et seq., 1 (ADA) protects the civil rights of disabled indi- viduals by making it unlawful to "discriminate against a quali- fied individual with a disability because of the disability... in regard to job application procedures, the hiring, advancement, or discharge of employees, employee compensation, job training, and other terms, conditions, and privileges of employment."2 Specifically, Title I of the ADA requires an employer to provide "reasonable accommodations" 3 for a "qualified individual's" 4 im- pairments or limitations unless doing so would cause an "undue t The author received her J.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Primer on U.S. Immigration Policy
    Primer on U.S. Immigration Policy Updated July 1, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R45020 SUMMARY R45020 Primer on U.S. Immigration Policy July 1, 2021 U.S. immigration policy is governed largely by the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), which was first codified in 1952 and has been amended significantly several times since. U.S. William A. Kandel immigration policy contains two major aspects. One facilitates migration flows into the United Analyst in Immigration States according to principles of admission that are based upon national interest. These broad Policy principles currently include family reunification, U.S. labor market contribution, origin-country diversity, and humanitarian assistance. The United States has long distinguished permanent from temporary immigration. Permanent immigration occurs through family and employer-sponsored categories, the diversity immigrant visa lottery, and refugee and asylee admissions. Temporary immigration occurs through the admission of foreign nationals for specific purposes and limited periods of time, and encompasses two dozen categories that include foreign tourists, students, temporary workers, and diplomats. The other major aspect of U.S. immigration policy involves restricting entry to and removing persons from the United States who lack authorization to be in the country, are identified as criminal aliens, or whose presence in the United States is determined to not serve the national interest. Such immigration enforcement is broadly divided between border enforcement—at and between U.S. land, air, and sea ports of entry—and other enforcement tasks including interior enforcement, detention, removal, worksite enforcement, and combatting immigration fraud. The dual role of U.S. immigration policy—admissions and enforcement—creates challenges for balancing major policy priorities, such as ensuring national security, facilitating trade and commerce, protecting public safety, and fostering international cooperation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Myopic Loss of Nationality Rights Leading to Statelessness
    SAHNI ARTICLE 3.3.21 (WORD) (DO NOT DELETE) 5/6/2021 7:21 PM THE MYOPIC LOSS OF NATIONALITY RIGHTS LEADING TO STATELESSNESS Binda Preet Sahni * I.INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 112 II.DISCUSSION ........................................................................................... 115 A. The Right to Nationality and the Right to Citizenship ........... 115 1. What is the Right to Nationality? ..................................... 116 2. What is the Right to Citizenship? ..................................... 118 B. Determining the Right to Nationality ..................................... 124 1. When a State Revokes Access to Nationality Rights ....... 124 2. When an Individual Loses Nationality Rights by His or Her Own Act ........................................................................... 137 III.CONCLUSION ........................................................................................ 144 ABSTRACT This article discusses how various jurisdictions address the loss or deprivation of nationality or citizenship that leads to statelessness. Nationality loss can occur by two means: a State may displace an individual’s right to nationality arbitrarily through its official or unofficial laws or through its conduct; alternatively, an individual may relinquish his or her existing nationality by his own intentional or inadvertent act. His or her contribution triggers operation of law which then limits access to nationality rights. * Binda Preet Sahni, PhD.
    [Show full text]