Refugees into Teaching – subcontract application process

There are currently 30 overseas-experienced ‘refugee teachers’ registered with the Refugees into Teaching project and living in and around the East Midlands. However, we believe that there are many more based here in need of help. We are therefore keen to increase and consolidate our support for these clients.

Refugees into Teaching (RiT) aims to provide free information, advice, guidance and support to refugees in the UK who wish to become qualified teachers or work in other support staff roles in UK state primary or secondary schools.

RiT is an England-wide project, funded by the Training and Development Agency for schools (TDA), and based at the Refugee Council offices in London and Leeds. The Refugee Council is a human rights charity, independent of government, which works to ensure that refugees are given the protection they need, that they are treated with respect and understanding, and that they have the same rights, opportunities and responsibilities as other members of our society.

As RiT doesn’t currently have a presence in the East Midlands, we are unable to deliver as much hands-on support as we would like.

For this reason, we are inviting charitable (or not-for-profit) organisations with a background in supporting adults into training and employment within the region to submit applications for funding to deliver Refugees into Teaching activities in the East Midlands

We are running a commissioning process for an available £20,000 to an organisation(s) that can coordinate some or all of the following activities in support of ‘refugee teachers’ over a 12 month period:

• Voluntary school placements
• Support group workshops
• Mentoring

Please see the attached commissioning documents for more information on how to apply. Closing date for applications 17th September.  Suggested delivery of activities to start on 11th October 2010 and run for 12 months.

If you would like to discuss any elements of this process or your application, please contact Andrew Lawton

RiT Commissioning – Accompanying Notes

RiT Commissioning – East Mids specification

RiT Commissioning – Application Form – FINAL

Refugee Council
Refugees into Teaching – Project manager

240-250 Ferndale Road, London. SW9 8BB, 020 7346 1167

www.refugeesintoteaching.org.uk

Refugee children share their experiences on Women’s Hour

Three fantastic teenagers who came to the UK with their families as refugees talk about their memories of fleeing their countries for Radio 4’s Women’s Hour. Their mature and sometimes even humorous accounts are a refreshingly positive example of how families have been able to rebuild their lives in the UK. Their stories are also available to read in the children’s books, Refugee Diaries, available from Amazon.

SA to resume deporting Zimbabweans

South Africa is to start expelling Zimbabweans again, from 31 December, the government has announced, ending their special status.

The deportations were halted in April 2009 following an influx of those fleeing political instability and economic meltdown in Zimbabwe.

An estimated two million Zimbabweans are thought to be in South Africa.

Their presence is one reason cited for outbreaks of xenophobic attacks in recent years.

Sixty-two people were killed in such attacks in 2008 and there were fears of renewed violence after the end of the football World Cup in July.

Human rights groups have condemned the South African government’s decision, the Associated Press news agency reports.

Zimbabwe exile groups fear that anyone forced to return could still face persecution.

Read more

Can political asylum seekers be expected to hide their political opinions?

By Matt Donmall

TM (Zimbabwe) and others v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] EWCA Civ 916 – Read judgment

Is it reasonable to expect an asylum seeker on their return to their home country to lie about their political beliefs and thereby avoid persecution? This question was recently addressed by the Court of Appeal in light of a potentially wide-ranging decision of the Supreme Court relating to gay refugees.

Last month the Supreme Court held in HJ (Iran ) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] UKSC 31 that to compel a homosexual person to pretend that their sexuality does not exist is to deny him his fundamental right to be who he is (see our post). When an applicant applies for asylum on the ground of a well-founded fear of persecution because he is gay, if the tribunal concludes that a material reason for his living discreetly on his return would be a fear of the persecution which would follow if he were to live openly as a gay man, then his application should be accepted [para 82].

Read more

Post flight spouses of refugees

By Free Movement

Some tremendously good news for many refugees: in the new case of FH (Post-flight spouses) Iran [2010] UKUT 275 (IAC) the tribunal has found that Article 8 appeals by the spouses of refugees who married the refugee after the refugee left the country of origin should normally be allowed. Ever since refugees started being granted only five years leave to remain rather than ILR back in August 2005, this has been a real problem for some refugees. After all, why should a businessman or work permit holder with limited leave have the right to bring a spouse to the UK but a refugee should not?

See paragraph 25:

Unless there is some justification, of which we have not been made aware, of the Rules’ treatment of post-flight spouses, we think that the Secretary of State ought to give urgent attention to amending the Rules, by extending either paragraph 281 or, (perhaps preferably) paragraph 194, so as to extend to the spouses of those with limited leave to remain as refugees. In the mean time, it seems to us that although a decision based on Article 8 does have to be an individual one in each case, it is most unlikely that the Secretary of State or an Entry Clearance Officer will be able to establish that it is proportionate to exclude from the United Kingdom the post-flight spouse of a refugee where the applicant meets all the requirements of paragraph 281 save that relating to settlement.

It is unusual for the tribunal explicitly to go beyond the facts of the particular case, so the panel (which included Lord Justice Sedley) must have felt quite strongly about the issue and clearly wanted to give a strong steer to Immigration Judges.

This is one of several very interesting cases that have just emerged from the shadowy reporting committee of the Upper Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber.

Damage to children in detention exposed

A new report by Medical Justice, due to be published in September, reveals the extent of physical and emotional harm to children detained in immigration removal centres, with two-thirds of children becoming ill or being hurt whilst in detention.

Read more

Dont Deprive Refugees of Access to Justice

By Ayesha Christie

Closure of Refugee and Migrant Justice has left 10,000 asylum seekers without legal representation to fight ‘culture of disbelief’

The tragic death of Osman Rasul last week confirmed some of my worst fears of how the closure of Refugee and Migrant Justice (RMJ) would impact on some of our most vulnerable clients.

I left RMJ a few months before it went into administration. My former clients included victims of trafficking, torture survivors, children and rape victims. Some had recently arrived in Britain and were in the initial stages of the asylum process; others had been here for many years and, like Rasul, were in the process of submitting fresh claims for asylum. The majority of those making these claims were initially unrepresented or poorly represented, and the evidence required to support their case was not previously obtained or put forward, resulting in a negative decision. Some were destitute and had been living in limbo for years, and many clients now suffer from mental health problems.

The sudden closure of RMJ left around 10,000 clients without legal representation. Many were left unclear as to what was happening with their case, and how and where to find another legal representative when there are so few immigration lawyers. We knew that given the fragile mental state of many of our clients, losing their legal representative with no warning or appropriate explanation could have devastating consequences.

Without a quality legal representative, an asylum applicant barely stands a chance when faced with the adversarial asylum system and “culture of disbelief” is pervasive within the Home Office and UK society in general. This is largely thanks to politicians and the press bandying around terms like “illegal immigrant”, “economic migrant” and “bogus asylum seeker” without regard or understanding of what it means to be fleeing persecution.

From day one, I worked to the expectation that my clients would be refused asylum initially and their cases were likely to go on to appeal, as the Home Office refuses approximately 75% of asylum applications. 28 per cent go on to win at appeal; others appeal further if the immigration judge is found to have made a legal error in dismissing their case. Sometimes the Home Office refusal letters are well reasoned, but in many cases the reasoning is weak, the evidence is outdated or selective, and in one case my client’s refusal letter was copied word for word from that of her partner– despite the fact the reasons for refusal did not apply to her case.

This week saw another example of the distorted media coverage of this issue. A front-page article in the Times on the absence of Home Office representatives at immigration appeal hearings declared: “Thousands take advantage of undefended appeal tribunals” – a statement that is profoundly misleading.

First, the article conflates asylum with migration, not comprehending that there is a difference between those who are fleeing persecution and are recognised as refugees in need of international protection, and those who have migrated to the UK – whether it be to study, work or reside with an immediate family member. Then there is the suggestion that immigration judges, whose job it is to consider all the evidence and submissions from both sides, fail to do so in the absence of a Home Office presenting officer, resulting in a neverending flood of migrants entering the UK. This is irresponsible journalism, and far from reality.

It is undoubtedly in the interests of justice that representatives are present for both parties at the appeal. However, in the absence of a Home Office presenting officer, the judge is still required to review the Home Office’s reasons for refusing the application, and the Judge may question the appellant on issues raised.

The Times indicates that 41,470 immigration cases were allowed on appeal in 2009, of which 17,473 were unattended by the Home Office. But the real concern is not whether these hearings were attended by the Home Office, but that so many immigration cases are refused by the UK Border Agency, appealed, and subsequently allowed. What the statistics really show is that, last year, the Home Office made an incorrect decision in over 40,000 cases.

The legal aid budget is expected to be significantly cut under the new coalition government. So the priority should be improving the quality of decision-making within the UK Border Agency. Depriving asylum seekers of their opportunity to access justice will result in greater spending in the longer term and have a devastating impact on the lives of vulnerable individuals in genuine need of protection.

• Anyone wishing to donate money for the repatriation of Osman Rasul’s body to Iraq, please visit Friends of Osman Mohammed

Qualified refugee teachers working in un-skilled jobs

Published in TES Magazine on 6 August, 2010 | By: Adi Bloom

Wrenched from their families, forced to flee their homeland in fear of their lives, the vast majority of asylum-seeker teachers in this country then suffer the frustration and indignity of being prevented from resuming their careers

Read more

Women refugees: stories of success and survival in Britain

Negotiating the class system, learning to love the weather and enduring the loss of status…..They are just some of the challenges that await refugees arriving in Britain.

By Anna van Praagh

Face the Facts

BBC Radio 4 Face the Facts is looking at legal representation for people in the asylum system – you can hear the programme next Thursday 5th August at 12.30 and at 9pm on Sunday 8th August, and you’ll be able to listen again online via this link. It’s been researched in the wake of Refugee Migrant Justice going into administration and closing.

bbc.co.uk/radio4/facethefacts

Next Page »