THE UNIVERSITY OF HULL Dealt with on their Merits? The Treatment of Asylum Seekers in the UK and France being a Thesis submitted for the Degree of PhD Social Policy in the University of Hull by Bob Mouncer BA, MA September 2009 CONTENTS Abstract iii Acknowledgements iv Abbreviations v Introduction 1 Chapter 1 Refugee protection in the modern world 4 Chapter 2 Immigration and race in the UK since the Second World War 23 Chapter 3 Immigration and race in France since the Second World War 51 Chapter 4 Contexts and systems 92 Chapter 5 Seeking asylum in the UK: early stages 116 Chapter 6 Seeking asylum in the UK: main interview and initial decision 135 Chapter 7 Seeking asylum in the UK: appeals 169 Chapter 8 Seeking asylum in the UK: detention and deportation 190 Chapter 9 Seeking asylum in France 227 Chapter 10 Conclusions 274 Appendix I Methodology 288 Appendix II UK asylum-seeker/refugee interviewees 294 Appendix III Questions to asylum seekers/refugees 296 Appendix IV Stakeholder interviewees 301 Appendix V Question guides for key informants 303 References 313 ABSTRACT This study examines the treatment of asylum seekers in the UK and France. The need for such a study arises from the apparent contradiction between, on the one hand, the commitment of EU states to give protection to people fleeing persecution (they are all signatories to the 1951 Refugee Convention) and, on the other, the increasingly restrictive policies on asylum adopted by those same states. In order to understand asylum-seeker perspectives I interviewed asylum seekers in the UK, though not in France due to my increasing deafness, and I interviewed stakeholders in both countries who could give me both official and asylum-seeker perspectives. Documentation was provided by asylum seekers and their supporters, NGOs in the field and government sources. I find that the restrictive agenda of the two states has undermined their commitment to the Refugee Convention as they place asylum policy in the context of immigration controls rather than of protection. Consequently, in both countries a discourse develops, laws are made and practices arise which undermine the right to asylum and deny protection to many who need it. ACKNOWLDEGEMENTS Research is said to be a lonely task. True as that is, I did not do this research alone. Without the help and support of a whole number of people it would not have been completed. Professor Gary Craig and Dr Majella Kilkey were my supervisors at Hull: they encouraged, cajoled, pointed me in many fruitful directions, continually asked ―Have you thought of this?‖ and, when I got stuck with problems which I thought had no solution, they managed to suggest more than one. A brown envelope in the post usually contained several articles that Gary thought might be ―grist to your mill‖ – and they were. Majella always had a book to lend which would put a different slant on an issue and get me rewriting. They encouraged me when I was feeling negative, and their support was crucial. Professor Max Silverman at Leeds University gave me much help and many leads in our discussions about immigration in France: his experience and knowledge have left their mark on chapter 3. Interviews with asylum seekers were made possible by the various gatekeepers and others who encouraged asylum seekers to tell me their stories. In Hull, these were Gary Power at the 167 Centre, Lynne Coley and her team at the ARKH Centre, Beata Barker at Hull College and Steve Ibbetson of Hull City Council‘s Asylum Support Team. At the College of North East London, Philip Naylor and Sarika Chaudhuri cheerfully adapted their English classes around my schedule during my two trips to London. In Glasgow, Ian Chisholm of Positive Action in Housing (PAIH) spent time contacting clients and set aside a room at the PAIH office for the interviews; Cat and the team of volunteers at the Unity Centre made interviews possible despite their rather more cramped conditions. Even more than to these aiders and abettors of the interview process, thanks are due to the asylum-seeker participants themselves. They gave time and effort to answering my questions and to helping me understand what it is like to be an asylum seeker. Many of them willingly relived their most painful experiences for my benefit. I also thank those who, by declining my invitation, reminded me that asylum seeking is no light matter: these include two women who, after discussion between themselves, said, ―No thanks, it‘s enough, we don‘t want to talk about all that any more‖; and the young woman who simply cried at the start of the interview, apologised, and withdrew her consent. In France, Véronique Njo, who had worked for the official asylum agency OFPRA, introduced me to two people at opposite ends of the asylum spectrum: François Brun, a supporter of the sans-papiers, and Philippe Bolmin, an official of the Appeals Commission for Refugees. Both agreed to be interviewed and both kept in touch, giving helpful information and advice, as well as voicing their opinions, by email. Last, but not least, my thanks are due to Mary Phillips, who proofread the whole thesis. Her eagle eye and trenchant comments saved me from many errors. The responsibility for what follows, however, is mine alone. ABBREVIATIONS Abbreviations used in the UK IND: Immigration and Nationality Directorate AIT: Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (predecessor of the BIA in the Home Office) API: Asylum Policy Instructions IOM: International Organization for Migration ASU: Asylum Screening Unit IPPR: Institute for Public Policy Research BIA: Border and Immigration Agency (part of the IRC: Immigration Removal Centre Home Office) IRO: International Refugee Organization BID: Bail for Immigration Detainees IWCP: Iraqi Workers‘ Communist Party CIPU: Country Information and Policy Unit KDP: Democratic Party of Kurdistan CRE: Commission for Racial Equality LDSG: London Detainee Support Group ECHR: European Convention on Human Rights LSC: Legal Services Commission ECRE: European Council on Refugees and Exiles MSF: Médecins sans Frontières HOPO: Home Office Presenting Officer NAM: New Asylum Model (appearing before a tribunal) NASS: National Asylum Support Service IAP: Inter-Agency Partnership NCADC: National Coalition of Anti-Deportation IAS: Immigration Advisory Service Campaigns IAT: Immigration and Appeals Tribunal NGO: Non-Governmental Organisation (predecessor of the AIT) PAIH: Positive Action in Housing ICAR: Information Centre about Asylum Seekers PUK: Patriotic Union of Kurdistan and Refugees RDS: Research Development and Statistics ICESCR: International Covenant on Economic, (section of the Home Office) Social and Cultural Rights SEF: Statement of Evidence Form ILPA: Immigration Law Practitioners‘ UNHCR: United Nations High Commissioner for Association Refugees IMF: International Monetary Fund WB: World Bank IMIK: Islamic Party in Iraq Abbreviations used in France OFPRA: Office Français de Protection des ANAFÉ: Association Nationale d‘Assistance aux Réfugiés et Apatrides (the agency dealing with Frontières pour les Étrangers asylum applications) APRF: Arrêté Préfectoral de Reconduite à la ONI: Office National d‘Immigration Frontière (deportation order) PAF: Police aux Frontières APS: Autorisation Provisoire de Séjour PCF: Parti Communiste de France (temporary residence pass) PS: Parti Socialiste ARV: Aide au Retour Volontaire (voluntary RPR: Rassemblement Pour la République return scheme) (political party of the right) ATA: Allocation Temporaire d‘Attente SONACOTRA: Société Nationale de (temporary state benefit) Construction pour les Travailleurs CADA: Centre d‘Accueil des Demandeurs UDF: Union pour la Démocratie Française d‘Asile (accommodation centre) (political party of the right) CESEDA: Code de l‘Entrée et du Séjour des UDR: Union des Démocrates pour la République Étrangers et du Droit d‘Asile (the law relating to (political party of the right) immigration and asylum) CFDA: Coordination Française pour le Droit d‘Asile (French NGO) CFDT: Confédération Française Démocratique du Travail (trade union close to the PS) CGT: Confédération Générale du Travail (trade union affiliated to the PCF) CNCDH: Commission Nationale Consultative des Droits de l‘Homme CNDA: Cour Nationale du Droit d‘Asile (previously CRR) CRA: Centre de Rétention Administrative (detention centre) CRR: Commission des Recours des Réfugiés (now CNDA) DOM-TOM: Départements d‘Outre Mer- Territoires d‘Outre Mer FN: Front National (racist, far-right political party) LICRA: Ligue Internationale Contre le Racisme et l'Antisémitisme MRAP: Mouvement contre le Racisme, l‘Antisémitisme et pour la Paix INTRODUCTION Protection or exclusion? I identify the problem to be addressed in this research in the following terms. The asylum policies of European Union (EU) states have become increasingly restrictive over the past two decades and those states justify their restrictive policies on a number of grounds, including alleged abuse of the asylum system by those seeking to circumvent legal immigration controls, the perceived need to limit numbers on economic grounds, fears that social cohesion may be threatened, that the state‘s resources will be drained, and the need to defend the country from terrorists. But the same states also claim to take seriously their obligations under the Refugee Convention and other international instruments, including the European Convention on Human Rights. I want to know, therefore, whether the asylum policies and practices of two EU states (the UK and France) enable them to fulfil their obligations, under the Refugee Convention, to protect victims of persecution and uphold the right to asylum, or whether those states undermine that right through an increasingly restrictive agenda which prioritises immigration control over protection. It seemed important to look at individual states, for EU policy reflects the interests and preoccupations of its member states and I chose two of them. I chose the UK and France because I am familiar with both of them: I was born in the UK and have a good knowledge of UK politics and society; I lived in Paris from 1990 to 1995 and understand something of France from that experience.