In the last couple of months a lot has been said with regards to children being detained for immigration purposes pending their removal from the UK with their parents. (Pictured: Every year 2000 children are detained for the purposes of immigration control in the UK.)
Every year apparently 2000 children in the UK are detained for the purposes of immigration control. Children subject to immigration control are detained on exactly the same basis as adults. The basis of their detention is that they are the children of asylum seekers or that the state believes them to be over 18years of age. They are detained indefinitely because the state believes they are likely to abscond or their removal from the country is imminent.
The coalition government has declared at several instances that it seeks to put an end to child detentions. Recently a brief was leaked to the press in which it was stated that the state would initiate a pilot project in which a few selected families would be told to leave the country voluntarily in two weeks failing which they would be forced to leave the country.
This brief cites the above as an alternative to detention of children, but is it? Detention of the children has been criticised because it violates the childs fundamental right not to be detained without just cause. In my view the alternative that has been advanced infringes other rights. Its merely the case of robbing Peter to pay Paul. The first thing that catches my eye is the fact that the families would be selected. On what criteria would the selection take place?
Some of the failed asylum seekers have been in the country for years, more than 10 years for some, and have developed strong ties to this country and now the state simply asks them to leave the country in two weeks.
Some of the children who are subject to these voluntary removals have been in this country since birth they know no other place as home. In my view it is cruel to simply request that they be yanked out of the home and asked to break such ties in just two weeks.
The detention of children is being questioned because of the grappling psychological effects it has on the children. Haphazard unplanned removals have the same psychological effect. Detained children find it hard to come to grips as to why they being detained in a prison when they have done nothing wrong.
All the UK government is doing is solving their problem by creating a problem for another government, and children are being caught in the cross fire. The ultimate result is that parents and children will find themselves destitute in their countries of origin.
It is most certain that the failed asylum seekers will make legal challenges to the voluntarily removals. The HO is still struggling to clear the backlog with regards to asylum cases hence it clear that they will not be able to deal or deliver any judicial review decisions anytime soon the result being that instead of clearing up the clogged up system they are merely creating another legal means for asylum seekers to stay in the country. Until their matters are dealt with any pending removals are stayed.
While I totally agree that the detention of children for immigration purposes should stop, I think the alternative presented in the leaked brief will clearly cause more problems and is a greater intrusion on the rights of the child.
Post published in: Opinions