Asylum seekers prevented from lodging claims

The Law Society has claimed that asylum seekers in Croydon are being prevented from lodging claims with telephones rarely answered, applicants being turned away and reports of ‘degrading treatment’.

Read more

Source: Guardian

April 2011 and beyond: points, caps and settlement

Immigration Law Practitioners Association (ILPA)

30 March 2011, 4 – 7.15pm London

This session aims to arm practitioners with everything they need to know about the changes to be introduced on April 6 2011 and to analyse the potential pitfalls and strategic solutions. Topics to be covered include permanent caps and criteria changes for Tier 2 General and Intra-Company Transfers; changes to Tier 1 (General), Tier 1 (Entrepreneur and Investor) and the fate of Tier 1 (Post Study Worker); the new Tier 1 (Exceptional Talent) route and transitional arrangements. Course costs vary: ILPA members £180, CR*£120, others £360.

For more information and to register, please follow this link: http://www.ilpa.org.uk and use the training tab.

Refugee and international protection update,

13 April 2011, London,
4pm – 7.15pm

This will help legal practitioners make sure they are fully up to speed with legal developments on refugee law, subsidiary protection, other human rights conventions relevant to protection of migrants, and have identified litigation likely to arise out of these developments. The course will review recent developments, understand the full potential of the caselaw, are conversant with the latest procedures and understand the areas in which the law is developing.

The course costs vary: ILPA members £120, CR*£60, non-members £240.

Please follow this link for more information and to register: http://www.ilpa.org.uk and use the training tab.

Immigration detention of two families unlawful

The High Court has ruled that two families were unlawfully detained in Yarl’s Wood immigration removal centre.

Read more

Source: Independent

Legal aid withdrawal to affect thousands

Hundreds of thousands of people with family and housing law problems will no longer have access to free legal advice under government proposals announced today.

Measures proposing the most drastic cuts to legal aid in its 60-year history would seek to reduce the number of civil law cases by 547,000 a year in what ministers describe as an attempt to save money and “discourage a culture of litigation”.

“At more than £2bn per year, we currently have one of the most expensive legal aid systems in the world,” said the justice minister, Jonathan Djanogly.

“In civil legal aid and private family law people are too often willing to hand over their personal problems to the state … there is a lack of appreciation of the implications of going to court. The need to make savings provides us with the impetus and urgency for change.”

Read more

Also read: Legal aid cuts hamper justice

Legal aid cuts are a brutal shrinkage of justice

Legal aid cuts: the aftermath

What You Need to Know in Some Unusual Situations

Occasionally when you are living or travelling away from home, situations arise that may leave you wondering how your legal status is affected. In some cases, information on current immigration UK law may be required, or you can look for help at various government and immigration web sites. For the purposes of this article we will look briefly at some of the more common situations that arise from time to time.

If your marriage breaks up while you are in the UK

If you are a spouse or partner of a British citizen and have yet to receive your permanent status to remain in the UK and your marriage suffers a break-up, you will likely have to leave the UK. If you are no longer living with your partner then you are not meeting the requirements of your visa.

If you are bereaved while in the UK

If you have temporary permission to stay as the partner of a settled UK citizen, and that person has passed away, and you were living together at the time, you can apply on your own to remain in the UK. There is an application form that you must fill out as soon as you have made the decision that you wish to remain. You do not need to wait until the remaining time of your temporary stay has expired.

If you are the victim of domestic violence

If you have temporary permission to stay as the partner of a UK citizen, and that relationship breaks down due to domestic violence, you may be able to apply to remain on your own in the UK as a permanent resident. There will be an application process, and you will have to demonstrate proof of the violence. Your dependants if any can also be included in your application. For complete information of the procedures to be followed in this situation it is highly recommended that you contact a reputable UK immigration lawyer or recognised government organization.

If you want to extend your stay in the UK

If your temporary or visitor visa is about to expire and you wish to extend your stay, you may be able to apply to stay under a different migration category. If you have come to the UK as a visitor you will not be able to extend your visitor status as it can only be for six months. There are other migration categories that may suit your situation just as well. If this is your planned course of action, be sure to make your application before your existing visitor visa expires. If you leave it until the visa has expired you may be asked to leave the country. Be sure to check out the different immigration categories well in advance in order to determine if there is a category that fits your situation and is worth the time, expense and effort of the application.

Please note that these articles and the information contained herein are purely for general guidance and do not constitute a professional legal or any other opinion as to the merits of a particular application or whether specific immigration requirements have been met of a particular category. This information is generic and should not be relied upon as a definitive guide to fulfilling specific category requirements. However should any individual do so it is at his or her own risk for which UK Migration Lawyers Limited cannot be held responsible in any way.

Gazala Rashid
UK immigration lawyers

Immigration and Asylum Law

By Gazala Rashid

Asylum law is nothing new and tracks its roots all the way back to the middle ages. Asylum law is a law that outlines situations for an individual or group that is under persecution by their home country, for political or spiritual beliefs, or is considered not safe in their own country and is thus looking to migrate to a different one for protection. This takes place all over the world, and if you’re considering entering the U.S. or the U.K. under these circumstances, it would be very important for you to contact a U.S. or U.K. immigration lawyer first, to see if you are eligible.

Asylum law is not quite refugee law and there is a large difference. Asylum law concerns the right of asylum, as opposed to refugee law, which concerns huge groups of people fleeing from a country. Most of the time, the seekers for asylum are often considered rebels or dissidents in their own countries and are not physically safe. Therefore, they seek asylum in a friendly country, consistent with their beliefs and values. In return, this country offers them asylum and protection. It is important to note, however, that in some cases these laws do sometimes overlap, as refugees sometimes demand to be treated as asylum cases, or vice versa.

Asylum has general legal stipulations surrounding it, as in any other case, and is usually treated on a case by case basis. However, asylum is different in each nation, and some may be generally stricter than others. In fact, many countries take extremely different viewpoints on what asylum law is, and what it should be which can create confusion. International law also states that a country does not have to surrender the asylum seekers, who are often considered criminals in their home country, if they don’t want to. This can make the complicated process even more complex, if the two countries are not working together.

Making the process even more complicated is the recent advent of the Extradition treaty which has given more power back to the government instead of the asylum seeker. Extradition treaties are treaties that give the home country of the asylum seeker the right to demand their return, and under international law, they would have no choice but to oblige. However, not every nation has signed this treaty, and if they have not signed they are under the international law to obey it. This happens all the time in asylum cases where asylum seekers go to countries that are friendly to their beliefs, and do not have an extradition treaty with the person’s home country. If you are seeking asylum in another country or feel that you may qualify for asylum, it is best to talk to an immigration lawyer so he can tell you exactly what you need to look out for when dealing with this complicated area of international law.

Gazala Rashid has been an immigration lawyer in the UK since 1999. She has great expertise in all aspects of UK immigration, asylum and nationality law, and you may view her articles on these topics in her blog at www.ukmigrationlawyers.co.uk/blog

Bennett case shows selective application of law:Communities Point

By Julius Sai Mutyambizi-Dewa

COMMUNITIES Point is completely discouraged by the continuing selective application of the law in Zimbabwe.

In the same week when Major General Rugeje is accused of having threatened MDC MP Chiminya with murder and went ahead to prove his intentions by pointing a loaded pistol but still managed to retain his freedom, the continuing denial of freedom to Senator Bennett is clearly for the sole purpose of persecution.

One of the weaknesses of Zimbabwe’s judiciary has been the selective application of the law and many Zimbabweans have always hoped that at some stage this very evil tradition will come to pass.

Since 1980 negative sanctions have always been used against opponents of ZANU PF and this is true of the disproportionate nature of the punishment meted on the likes of Dumiso Dabengwa, the late Lookout Masuku and many of the current opponents of the ZANU PF Government.

It had been hoped that with the advent of the Government of National Unity, common sense will prevail to the extent that the good of the nation will override actions that stem from pure emotion.

Roy Bennett is a victim of ZANU PF’s retribution because in 2000 he decided to abandon the Party he had flirted with for a very long time and joined the Movement for Democratic Change.

ZANU PF must come clean and rebut this presumption; otherwise all the machinations against Roy Bennett from whichever court will simply be seen as retributive justice by a political party that is simply using the advantages of incumbency.

The State seems to have completely failed to prove the nexus between Roy Bennett’s donation to Hitschmann and the alleged procurement of weapons by the later.

It is Roy Bennett’s right to choose who to give his money but in the absence of specific, conclusive instructions to Hitschmann that he purchases the so-called weapons, the State can not convince Zimbabweans that Roy’s conviction is safe.

Having donated the gift of money to a troubled and desperate friend, who according to the State might have thought 12 rifles and grenades, could buy him freedom in a state that had decided human rights did not matter anymore, Senator Bennett can not be held responsible for what the donee used his donation. He can not be arrested for giving money to Hitschmann.

In any case the State must also take full responsibility for its own earlier actions because it will be too much to demand from the Zimbabwe public if they expected them to keep quiet when their homes were being destroyed by Operation Murambatsvina, they were being murdered for having different political opinions, they were having their crops and acreage taken and equipment looted because of their race and they were losing their jobs and dignity in a Government sanctioned raid on the people’s rights to dignified citizenry.

There comes a time when the Government of Zimbabwe, then led by ZANU PF, should say to the people of Zimbabwe, “Sorry we offended you, it was  that time but may we now move on!” That Zimbabweans did not resort to full-scale armed conflict against them remains the Greatest Miracle of our time!

We demand the immediate release of Senator Bennett and all the other political detainees and a complete end top victimisation.

JULIUS SAI MUTYAMBIZI-DEWA
[email protected] or 00447529705413

Lawyers for Young People helpline launched

A new innovative internet and phone service offering legal advice specifically to young people is to be piloted in Lambeth, Camden and Colchester by The Children’s Society. Lawyers for Young People will be available to all young people but it is particularly aimed at ensuring the most vulnerable have a much better, easier route through to an appropriate legal advisor than is often the case now.

Certain groups of young people – those in care, the homeless, unaccompanied asylum seekers, children with communication problems and disabilities – often find it very difficult to get appropriate advice from a lawyer.

The service is initially being trialled as a pilot scheme across three areas, the London Boroughs of Lambeth and Camden, and Colchester in Essex, from September 8 with a full nationwide roll out plan scheduled from April 2010 onwards.

Experts working for the service will help young people work out when, how and who will help with their problems and, if necessary, find a solicitor to advise.

Young people can call the service on 0800 092 0953 or email [email protected]. During the pilot phase the phone will be manned Tuesday, Thursday and Friday, 10.00am to 12.30pm and Wednesday 3pm to 5 pm.

The service builds upon an initial project set up by Fisher Jones Greenwood LLP, a commercial and family law firm. The Children’s Society acquired the unit in April 2009.

The service will work with young people in the following ways:

• Identify whether there is a legal issue in need of representation
• Provide initial advice on the specific legal issue being faced
• Refer, if appropriate and possible, the young person to a lawyer from within an established network of specialist law firms
• Supply a body of evidence for output measurements facing specific key groups – leading to policy change, judicial review, test case representation etc.

Liz Fisher-Frank, Principal Solicitor, Lawyers for Young People, commented: “I believe that many young people, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds, are unable to access the legal representation that they desperately need. The pilot phase will give the unique opportunity to young people in these three areas to access high quality legal advice, whilst also helping us to establish the long-term viability of the project”.

LFYP has been supported by a number of law firms and charities at its inception stages. These include Fisher Meredith LLP, The Howard League for Penal Reform, Bindmans LLP, Scott-Moncrieff, Harbour & Sinclair, Fisher Jones Greenwood LLP and Refugee and Migrant Justice.

For more information, contact Rafi Cooper at The Children’s Society’s media office on 020 7841 4422, or [email protected].

The Children’s Society is a leading children’s charity committed to making childhood better for all children in the UK. Visit www.childrenssociety.org.uk

Right to Work

Source:Free Movement

There are two recent important developments on this front.

The first is that the Home Office is appealing the ZO Somalia case on right to work for those who have made fresh asylum claims and have not received a decision within one year of their application. This may well be of interest to those stuck in the Legacy backlog awaiting decisions. Additionally, the Home Office are saying that even if they ultimately lose on the legal point, there is no obligation in European law to grant permission to work, only to decide the terms of access to the labour market. There will be no decisions made on right to work applications until the appeal is decided or the Home Office become, in their own language, ARE (Appeal Rights Exhausted).

The other important development applies only to Turks but is very important for them. In the new case of Sonmez v SSHD [2009] EWCA Civ 582 the Court of Appeal eventually concludes that prior breaches of immigration law do form an adequate basis for refusal of a permission to work application under the Ankara Agreement. The case concerns those who breached immigration law to establish employment or self employment and then have sought to rely on the Ankara Agreement to continue that employment or self employment. It is a split judgment, with Sedley LJ in the minority and Dyson and Maurince Kay LLJ in the majority. All agreed that the common law principle of ex turpi causa non oritur actio (’from a dishonorable cause an action does not arise’) was not by itself reason to refuse the applications. This was the basis of the Tribunal’s earlier decision. The Tribunal had raised the point of their own motion and not referred themselves to relevant authorities more or less confining that principle to contract or tort. The majority, however, found that previous breach of immigration laws to establish employment or self employment did amount to an abuse and, relying on the earlier cases of Tum and Dari, Kondova and LF (Turkey) this was sufficient reason in European Community law to deny the benefits of the Ankara Agreement.

As with ZO Somalia, this won’t be the end of the matter. Both issues will probably end up in the House of Lords and then the ECJ. That could be several years down the line, though.

Tsvangirai says country still lives in fear

(AP) — Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai said Saturday that his efforts to restore democratic freedoms and the rule of law to Zimbabwe have so far failed.

The former opposition leader took his Movement for Democratic Change into a coalition government with longtime autocratic President Robert Mugabe in February to end the country’s political deadlock and economic collapse.

But Tsvangirai gave his party’s annual convention a bleak assessment of Zimbabwe’s situation and said that hard-liners backing Mugabe were frustrating progress.

“We have not yet succeeded in restoring the rule of law … our people do not live free from fear, hunger and poverty,” he said.

The official state media remained biased and there was only limited freedom of movement and expression, he said.

“Our members continue to be the victims of political persecution,” Tsvangirai said. “That society for which we are striving bears little resemblance to the reality in which all of us live today,” he said.

His comments reflected the tensions wracking the so-called unity government. But despite the unhappiness, Tsvangirai has so far shown no sign that he will pull his party out of the coalition in protest.

Tsvangirai and more than 1,000 delegates to the two-day convention wore red T-shirts emblazoned with a new party slogan: “Together to the end. Marching to a New Zimbabwe.”

Despite agreeing to the coalition government, 85-year-old Mugabe still seems reluctant to cede real power to Tsvangirai, his former foe.

The two men are locked in dispute over the key appointments of the central bank governor Gideon Gono and the attorney general Johannes Tomana.

Mugabe reappointed Gono to a second five-year term as governor of the Reserve Bank in November and also unilaterally chose Tomana. Tsvangirai says the appointments violate the power-sharing deal and wants regional mediators to intervene.

Gono is blamed for printing Zimbabwe dollars until they were worthless and accused of taking hundreds of millions of dollars from foreign currency accounts belonging to aid groups and private businesses. Tomana also is accused of being behind detentions of pro-democracy activists.

Tendai Biti, Tsvangirai’s finance minister, has appealed for $8 billion to rebuild the shattered economy. But most donors and investors have insisted more reforms and the rule of law be in place before they commit funds.

Tsvangirai told his party loyalists Saturday the adoption of hard currency as the country’s legal tender halted world-record inflation of 500 billion percent in the now abandoned local currency.

More humanitarian aid was also being received to restore health services and collapsed utilities.

His party’s role in the coalition was “instrumental in stabilizing our economy and bringing it back from the brink of a truly national disaster,” he said.

Mugabe’s program to seize thousands of white-owned commercial farms is blamed for disrupting the agriculture-based economy since 2000 and leaving more than half the population in need of food handouts earlier this year.

Farmers groups have reported a new wave of seizures of white-run farms in recent weeks.

“Land reform must empower the majority of Zimbabwean without victimizing any of our citizens … It cannot be based on racist persecution that leaves productive land fallow and our people hungry,” Tsvangirai told the party convention that ends Sunday.

Also read related story : Robert Mugabe’s thugs chanted: ‘We will eat you children’ – The Times

Next Page »