Tag: UK

Death penalty report: August, September


September 2023

We are pleased to attach the latest death penalty report produced by group member Lesley for the period mid August to mid September 2023. As ever there is good news and bad with some countries engaged in heavy use of the penalty. China – believed to be the world’s largest executioner of its citizens – is briefly mentioned but detailed statistics are not available because they are a state secret. It is depressing to note in the UK, that following the conviction of Lucy Letby of murdering new born infants and attempting to murder others, a national newspaper ran a poll showing a strong majority to bring the death penalty back for such crimes.

August September (Word)Download
0

A change in the political climate for human rights


The post war human rights ideology is arguably now over and there is a need for new thinking

July 2023

The post war settlement and the introduction of a ‘rules based order’ for international affairs is arguably now in terminal decline. The creation of the United Nations and the introduction of the Universal Declaration seemed to usher in – many thought – a new way that governments would deal with each other and settle disputes through negotiation. The carnage of the Second World War in which millions of lives were lost was supposed to be a cathartic moment in world history, an event no one wanted to see repeated. Respect for human rights would be a core feature of how people lived around the world.

Recent history casts doubt on this idea and the rise of countries such as China, a post Stalinist Russia and the wealth of Saudi Arabia are beginning to show that the comforting idea of the rules based order is under considerable threat. More and more countries are showing that they can exist quite happily in the world by ignoring nearly all considerations of human rights and a democratic norms. China’s treatment of its Uighur minority has received wide coverage with nearly a million people being subject to so-called ‘re-education’ in an attempt to mould an entire population away from its beliefs and culture. They have almost eliminated any semblance of a free democracy in Hong Kong. Myanmar has brutalised its Rohingya minority forcing huge numbers out of the country. The treatment of Palestinians in Israel and the creation of what is effectively an apartheid state, shows that even a country with a powerful democratic system can behave badly towards those they wish to marginalise. We could quote other examples including Türkiye, Syria, Libya and more recently, Tunisia where in their different ways, human rights and the treatment of its citizens are a long way from the intentions of the Universal Declaration.

Sportswashing

We have discussed sportswashing in several previous posts and in particular, Saudi Arabia with its funding of Newcastle United football club for example, and hosting a Grand Prix, tennis and golf tournaments and other sporting investments. Since early 2021, they have invested at least £4.9bn ($6.3bn) in various sporting events and are currently seeking to purchase the footballer Kylian Mbappé from Paris St Germain for a reported €300m. For them it buys kudos. The sums are so large that a significant number of sports stars are willing to overlook any considerations of human rights and sign up for the various lucrative deals on offer. The extent of their denial of rights can be seen in a report by grant Liberty.

Commercial activity

It would be unfair to heap blame on sports stars alone. After a brief lull following the murder and dismemberment of Adnan Khashoggi, western firms are all too willing to get involved in the many deals and contracts on offer from the kingdom. Even architectural practices are lured to the many contracts of offer as part of the massive half a trillion dollar Neom development being proposed in south west Saudi. We have been happy to supply Saudi with a variety of weapons and personnel to enable it to carry on its war in Yemen creating what, according to the UN, is the worst humanitarian disaster in modern history. In addition to football clubs, the Saudi investment fund is being eagerly welcomed to Teesside.

The significance of the change has not really been taken on board. Saudi’s enormous wealth, China burgeoning power and the increasing post-colonial confidence of countries like South Africa, means there has been a shift away from the ‘Washington consensus’. Human rights have little if any role to play in most of the Gulf states. Opposition is banned, torture is widely practised, human rights activists harassed or arrested and media tightly controlled. A similar story exists in China which operates as a one party state and where human rights norms are largely ignored.

Countries like the UK seem almost to have given up on any pretence that human rights form part of their decision making and in our relations with these countries. In a sense, it is part of our national decline particularly economically. In a word, we can no longer afford to pick and choose. If we want investment in our country, especially in less popular areas (economically speaking) then if a country like Saudi has the money then so be it. If we want sell arms then we must hold our noses and sell to more or less anyone who needs them. Noises are made about export controls and end user certificates, but the pressure is to steer round them not to use them as a force to limit their sale. The recent loss of the court case concerning arms sales to Yemen is a case in point. It is not just the government’s failure to properly consider human rights issues and the terrible effects of bombing in Yemen, but the judges seemed also to push reason to one side in their judgement.

Post war consensus

Post war and in the half century or so which followed, was a period of hope and a belief that human rights could be encouraged around the world. It was not all plain sailing and it took a long time for oppressive states like East Germany to collapse along with other east European states to gain freedom from the Soviet Union. Many countries achieved independence from the colonial powers, France and the UK principally. The UN and its various agencies was able to pursue policies and programmes of benefit to millions of people, tackling polio for example.

In recent times, the leadership of US is coming under strain. Internally, it is struggling with the very concept of democracy. European states are far from united and although there has been some unity in the response to the invasion of Ukraine, they seem far from making the weather as far as human rights and the rule of law are concerned.

What is interesting about sport is the lack of conscience or morality among a significant number of sporting people. If the money is sufficient, they accept the gig, with seemingly no compunction. That women are treated as second class citizens, executions are carried on at an horrific rate, sometimes in public, torture is routine and LGBTQ people are punished or imprisoned, seems not to trouble them. The question is whether this reflects the zeitgeist of the population at large? Are people no longer interested in human rights considerations in our sporting and commercial actions? Have we reached a point in our history where we no longer believe in things which were always said to be a key part of the British character: decency, fair play and respect for the underdog? It would seem so. If the public is more concerned with entertainment and the success or otherwise of their team or sporting hero, who can blame the sportsmen and women taking the millions of riyals on offer?

There does need to be a rethink of our approach to human rights. The belief in largely state led approaches, through treaties, declarations, legal actions and the like, is no longer sustainable especially if the states concerned are more concerned with economic pressures than with the rights of people often far away. The centre of gravity has to a large degree shifted away from the West to countries like China, the Gulf states, Russia and non-aligned countries like Brazil. Some of these countries have a different concept of rights and see Western countries only too willing to turn a blind eye if contracts and sufficient money is on offer. It would seem a little foolish to continue pursuing the post-war ideology in a world which has substantially moved away from those ideas.

Sources include: Amnesty International; New Statesman; Guardian; CAAT, Grant Liberty

0

Refugee report – June


Refugees continue to generate considerable political tension in the UK

June 2023

We are pleased present our monthly refugee report thanks to group member Andrew for preparing it. Refugees, immigration and the boat people continue to generate a considerable degree of political and media heat in the country.

The latest immigration figures for 2022 give a total of 606,000 arrivals, but most of these are legal, and mainly students. There were 7,000 applications for asylum (by 91,000 people). In the first quarter this year 3,793 applications were received, compared to 4,548 last year. It is worth noting that the numbers are higher in France, Germany and Spain. Arrivals in the UK amount to just 7% of the European total.

Arrivals to the UK are just 7% of the European total

20,000 claimants were in detention in March, 20% fewer than last year, but the average period of detention was longer.

Few forced returns based on asylum claims have taken place, the majority of them being to Albania, where the new agreement has resulted in 90% of arrivals from Albania being returned there.

The Illegal Migration Bill is this week in committee stage in the House of Lords, and a vast number of amendments are being debated. The largest bone of contention currently is the lack of an economic impact assessment of the measures, which the government has said it will produce “in due course”. The BBC has claimed that the cost of the new rules will be up to £6 billion over the next two years. The Refugee Council have more precisely reckoned it at £8.7 to 9.5 billion over 3 years. The Home Office have admitted that numbers would have to be below 10,000 for the Act to be operational. On the plus side for the Government, former senior judge Lord Sumption has argued that justification for overruling their Rwanda plan by the ECHR would be “slender.” On this point, the Sun is reporting that the Home Office think they can make their first flight to Rwanda in September if the Court of Appeal rules in their favour.

The Prime Minister, on his visit to Dover this week, claimed that his policies were working, as the number of asylum seekers arriving in small boats was down 20% this year. Others have suggested this has had more to do with the weather in the English Channel, and the fact that most crossings take place between July and September.

It is reported that the two new vessels commissioned to house asylum seekers are cruise liners. Apart from the plan for a barge to be moored at Portland, other locations are presently unknown.

The Refugee Council has been protesting this week about the size of the accommodation made available to claimants. Operation Maximise is a deliberate initiative to cram as many claimants as possible into the available accommodation. The leader of Westminster Council has said it “defies common sense and basic decency.”

The UNHCR has produced an audit of the UK asylum system and declared it to be “flawed and inefficient.”  The report particularly points to a lack of training at the Home Office, inadequate information on claimants, lack of skill in interviewing, and an inability to assess children’s ages accurately.

An article in Coda Media has drawn attention to the EU’s International Centre for Migration Policy Development, a shady body based in Vienna that has been supplying Maghreb governments with material to aid disempowering boats aiming to cross the Mediterranean.

AH

0

UK government denies Apartheid operates in Israel


New British/Israeli agreement opposes use of the word ‘Apartheid’ to describe Israeli actions against the Palestinians

March 2023

On Tuesday, the UK government signed an agreement with the Israeli government part of which agreed to oppose the use of the word ‘Apartheid’ to describe Israeli’s actions in the occupied areas. Three substantial reports have been published describing the system in operation: one by Human Rights Watch, one by Amnesty and one by B’Tselem in Israel itself. We provided links to each in a previous post. Each is a closely argued and evidenced document and to our knowledge, has not received a detailed rebuttal from the Israeli government. Haaretz and other news organisations described Israel’s reaction to the Amnesty report as ‘hysterical’. The Israeli government described Amnesty as ‘anti-Semitic’.

The agreement says that it will also seek to confront anti-Israel bias in international relations including in the UN. The Palestinian Ambassador said it represented ‘an abdication of the UK’s responsibilities under international law and the UK’s unique responsibility to the Palestinian issue’.

President Netanyahu is on a visit to the UK this week and was met by a demonstration of Jewish people when he visited 10, Downing Street for a meeting with the prime minister. Banners and cries of ‘Dictator on the run’ greeted his arrival. There have been months of demonstrations in Israel itself over proposals to prevent Netanyahu being deprived of office if he is found guilty of corruption and other crimes (which he denies). The agreement’s description as a ‘freedom loving and thriving democracy’ seems extraordinary in view of these events.

The evidence of Israel’s mistreatment of its Arab population has been well documented. Many Israel politicians and writers have warned of the steady slide towards apartheid as has the Israeli group Yesh Din who gave a legal opinion that ‘the crime against humanity of apartheid is being committed on the West Bank’.

Israeli politicians have become increasingly worried that the unquestioning support the country received from the US is beginning to waver. More and more Americans are beginning to doubt Israeli actions and protestations of a desire for peace. The unquestioning and uncritical support by the UK government by contrast will be very welcome therefore. In addition to the Conservatives, Sir Keir Starmer is quoted as saying that ‘Israel is not an apartheid state’. Labour has experienced severe problems concerning alleged anti-Semitism and the party is keen to ‘root out’ the problem to use Starmer’s words. Neither party seems able to look at the evidence and they deny the facts, if for different reasons.

This is yet one more action by the UK government which seems to demonstrate an almost wilful neglect of human rights norms both within the UK and overseas. Its desire to get rid of the Human Rights Act as well as other legislation limiting the ability to protest or seek judicial review represent an increasingly authoritarian view. An official was quoted as saying that moral considerations now come a poor second to business and diplomacy.

Sources: International Centre for Justice for Palestine; Haaretz (English); Human Rights Watch; Amnesty International; Middle East Eye; Daily Mail; Guardian; Jewish Chronical.

0

Death penalty report


March 2023

We are pleased to attach the latest death penalty report for Mid February – March 2023 thanks to group member Lesley for the work in preparing it. The desire for the newly appointed deputy chair of the Conservative Party, Lee Anderson MP, for the reinstatement of the penalty in the UK is unwelcome.

Report (Word)Download
0

Death penalty report


Monthly Death Penalty report for Dec 2021 to mid Jan 2022

We are pleased to attach the latest monthly death penalty report thanks to group member Lesley for compiling it. Note that China – which is believed to execute more of its citizens than the rest of the world combined – is not included since details are a state secret.

Report (Word)Download
0

Refugee developments


Issues to do with refugees and immigrants continue to make waves in the UK

The main development post-Christmas 2021 on the UK refugee front has been the announcement of plans for the proposed Afghan Citizens’ Resettlement Scheme, originally promised in the Summer. Ministers confirmed that the resettlement scheme will open this month, providing up to 20,000 Afghan women, children, and others most at risk with a safe and legal route to resettle in the UK.

The ACRS will build upon the UK’s continuing efforts to support those at risk, alongside the relocation of British nationals, and those who supported our armed forces through the Afghan Relocation and Assistance Policy (ARAP).

The ACRS will prioritise:

  • those who have assisted UK efforts in Afghanistan
  • extremely vulnerable people such as women and girls at risk and members of minority groups

Minister for Afghan Resettlement, Victoria Atkins, said:

“We are committed to supporting everyone we have evacuated from Afghanistan to make a success of their new life in the UK. I’m very grateful to everyone who has stepped forward to help. The Afghan citizens resettlement scheme provides a safe and legal way for the most vulnerable and at-risk people from Afghanistan to come to the United Kingdom and rebuild their lives, as part of the New Plan for Immigration. Operation Warm Welcome is a huge national effort which could not succeed without the compassion and determination of our partners in local government, the private sector, voluntary organisations and the great British public. “

Further details will be set out this month, but a row has immediately broken out about how many of the refugees are among those already in the UK and whether the “most vulnerable” will be able to be resettled before 2023.

In 2021 a total of 28,300 refugees and asylum seekers arrived in England by boat, three times the number for 2020. The largest number arrived in November, many of them from Afghanistan. The sharp increase in numbers is at least partly accounted for by the reduction in ferry crossings post-COVID and the tighter control of lorries using the Channel Tunnel.

Government figures show that only 1,171 refugees were granted protection through resettlement schemes in the year to September.

Border Force officers are threatening to strike in response to Home Secretary Priti Patel’s Channel “pushback” tactics. The Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) said it was “totally opposed” to Patel’s tactics, which would see Border Force jet skis block and redirect migrant boats in the Channel back toward France. Both PCS and the Care4Calais charity have announced they’ll take the Home Office to court over the policy, while PCS General Secretary Mark Serwotka said his members could go further by striking and refusing to implement it.

Home Office policy

The Independent revealed that the government has given more than £700,000 to a “migration behaviour change” company that runs communications campaigns targeting asylum seekers in their home countries.

The Home Secretary ‘s latest thinking on asylum seekers seems to be directed at keeping even tighter control of those awaiting decisions. Under the Home Office’s “new plan for immigration”, Patel is expected to announce early in the new year that small boat arrivals will be electronically tagged.

Ministers also hope tagging working-age people will make it harder for them to work illegally while their asylum claims are processed, and make it easier to remove those whose application for asylum has failed. The plan has been described as “desperate and draconian” by the chief executive of the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants.

New bill

The Nationalities and Borders bill continues its progress, having now had a second reading in the Lords. The government’s current emphasis was expressed by Home Office minister Tom Pursglove, who said that the government was reforming its approach to asylum through its new plan for immigration.

“Seeking asylum for protection should not involve people asylum shopping country to country, or risking their lives by lining the pockets of criminal gangs to cross the Channel,” he said. “The nationality and borders bill will make it a criminal offence to knowingly arrive in the UK illegally and introduce life sentences for those who facilitate illegal entry into the country. It will also strengthen the powers of Border Force to stop and redirect vessels, while introducing new powers to remove asylum seekers to have their claims processed outside the UK.”

Free Movement have concluded that the changes to the bill have made it worse, mainly in the area of making it more difficult for asylum seekers to get hearings: “This Bill will entrench existing problems: people with a legitimate basis to stay in the UK – and genuine grounds to fear removal – can be removed without effective access to justice. Making it legally easier to remove people from the UK in principle does nothing to make the system any more efficient in practice. Greater effort should be made to increase the quality and accuracy of Home Office decision-making in the first place.”

Bridget Chapman, a blogger and refugee charity worker has noted the Home Office’s claims about the ages of migrants – her comments follow (courtesy of Free Movement)

  1. The Home Office has suggested that over 1,100 adults have lied and pretended to be child asylum seekers over the past year
  2. The Home Office has weaponised this claim and has used it to undermine sympathy for young refugees, saying they are not genuine children but predatory adult men
  3. Actually the figures are misleading anyway because of the completely inappropriate and inadequate ways in which assessments are made after young people arrive
  4. They are also misleading because many of the age assessments which find them to be adults are subsequently overturned (those pesky activist lawyers again, damn them)
  5. The Home Office is now promising ‘scientific methods’ for accurately assessing young people’s ages
  6. These methods don’t exist
  7. Much of the media are reporting on these ‘scientific methods’ and uncritically regurgitating Home Office press releases
  8. We should all be really cross about that
  9. There is a real danger to the many asylum-seeking children who are wrongly assessed as adults and have their safeguarding put at risk as a result
  10. Those of us working on the ground with young refugees have serious and growing concerns about this.

However, the biggest attacks on the bill have been about Clause 9, the ability of the Home Secretary to remove British citizenship more easily than at present. It has been suggested that this leaves up to 6 million citizens in jeopardy of such an eventuality.

On campaigning, note that the organisers of Refugee Week will be holding their planning conference online on two dates:

Monday 7 February 1030am – 1245pm
Friday 11 February 1030am – 1215pm

Places are available.

Other bills which will have an effect on human rights were discussed in a previous post.

0

Made in UK: bombed in Yemen


CAAT Webinar focusing on the role of UK arms firms in causing misery and death in Yemen

The purpose of the webinar was to focus on the role of UK arms suppliers in the continuing war in Yemen.  It featured a speaker from the Campaign Against the Arms Trade CAAT; one from Forensic Architecture and thirdly, Emily Thornberry MP.

The UK is not the only, or even the largest, supplier of weapons to the theatre, that role was taken by USA.  We must also not forget the role of the Iranian government who are supporting the Houthi rebels in the conflict.  Half of the Saudi air force is supplied by the UK and that includes spares and maintenance as well to keep them airworthy. US sales have been temporarily suspended by President Biden.

The Saudi government could not continue without UK support they suggested, not just in supplying weapons but diplomatic support as well in the UN.  We reported in 2015 the amazing news that Saudi had a seat on the UN’s Human Right’s Council.  It seems beyond belief that a country which executes people by decapitation with a sword, often in public, denies basic rights to women and uses torture as a matter of course, should have such a seat let alone be supported by the UK government.

The webinar put the role of arms suppliers in the spotlight who refuse to take responsibility for the mayhem their weapons cause.  Thousands have died and schools, hospitals, weddings and funerals have all been the subject of Saudi air raids.  RAF personnel are in Saudi to advise the Saudis yet many of these raids are in breach of International human rights.  There have been 55 airstrikes on health facilities alone. 

Hope for the future

The constant tide of grim stories which emerge from Yemen and the failure of our courts to hold the government to account, might make one despair at change ever being achieved.  The UK depends on the arms industry – and the network of City banks and agents who facilitate the movement of money – for a significant chunk of its exports.  They have been able to continue with this gruesome business because getting news and footage from the country is extremely difficult.  If the carnage was a regular feature of the news on TV things might have changed.  As it is, it can carry on largely unseen.

This might change with the arrival of an organisation called Forensic Architecture.  They are able to use forensic techniques to form linkages between airstrikes and the companies supplying the weapons.  They can show the impact of arms exports and the continuing targeting of civilians.  They can link therefore the sale of a jet to the bombing of a hospital.  Up to now, the companies, supported by the UK government, have been able to claim these violations are isolated incidents following the Court of Appeal decision to ban such sales.  Liz Truss claimed a review had been undertaken enabling sales to continue. Evidence gained by these methods will show complicity and make it harder to argue against complicity in what are war crimes.  This might be a game changer.

Forensic evidence might be a game changer

Emily Thornberry MP

Emily Thornberry is the shadow Secretary of International Trade opposite the minister, Liz Truss MP.  She said there have been 5 years of deceit practised on the British people.  The so called ‘isolated incidents’ based on the curious logic that as they were at different times and in different places therefore they are isolated.  British staff in Saudi ‘were in a different room’ therefore not complicit the minister claimed.  She pointed to the changing statements about the use of cluster munitions.  Her main point was that the UK has come to rely on these sales and it has distorted our policy in the region.  The government is caught in a web of complicity from which it cannot easily escape.  They will never change their position unless forced to do so by the Courts (which on previous experience is unlikely) or public opinion. 

Companies, civil servants and ministers are subject to the International Criminal Court for war crimes.  Will a case against those who were complicit in these crimes or who turned a blind eye, find themselves in front of the ICC?

A CAAT report on the arms trade was published today (14th July)

See also Mwatana and the Yemen Data Project and Human Rights Watch

1

Amnesty’s annual report: UK element


Aspect of the annual report detailing the UK government’s actions regarding human rights of UK subjects

The government response to COVID-19 raised human rights concerns, including in relation to health, immigration policies, domestic abuse and housing. Instances of racial discrimination and excessive force against protesters by the police were documented. Northern Ireland made progress on same-sex marriage and abortion, but full accountability for past violations remained unrealized. New licences for military exports to Saudi Arabia resumed. Bills on counter-terrorism and overseas military operations endangered  human rights.  Extradition proceedings against Julian Assange threatened the right to freedom of expression. The full report can be accessed from this link (pdf).

BACKGROUND

On 31 January, the UK left the European Union and began an 11-month transition period.

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, parliament granted far-reaching emergency powers to the UK and devolved governments for up to two years, subject to parliamentary renewal every six months. Lockdowns implemented to slow the spread of the virus severely restricted freedom of movement, freedom of peaceful assembly and the right to privacy and family life.

At least 74,570 people died in the UK as a result of COVID-19 in 2020. The economic impact of the pandemic caused widespread hardship, particularly for those in insecure employment and people subject to immigration controls.

In May and June, Black Lives Matter protests drew attention to systemic racism and discrimination against Black people.

RIGHT TO HEALTH

The UK death toll due to COVID-19 represented one of the highest death rates from the virus in Europe. Health and other essential workers reported shortages of adequate personal protective equipment (PPE) to minimize their risk of contracting COVID-19. By 25 May, 540 deaths involving COVID-19 had been registered among social care and health workers. The authorities violated the right to health and right to life of older people resident in care homes, including by failing to provide adequate PPE and regular testing, discharging infected or possibly infected patients from hospitals to care homes and suspending regular oversight procedures.

In June, an official investigation found that people of Black and Asian ethnicity were disproportionately impacted by COVID-19. In particular, Black and Asian health workers were significantly over-represented among COVID-19 related deaths of health workers.

The government resisted calls from over 70 organizations to immediately launch an independent public inquiry into its handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, stating that an inquiry would take place at an unspecified time in the future.

DISCRIMINATION

In March, a review of the so-called “Windrush scandal” was published. The review identified serious failings in the government’s treatment of the Windrush generation, who settled in the UK as British nationals from the Caribbean and other Commonwealth countries before 1973 but who, along with some of their descendants, were later treated as if they had no permission to be in the UK. Although the government promised to act on the far- reaching recommendations of the review, the proposed changes failed to address the root causes of the scandal, including the racism embedded in nationality and immigration laws and policies.

Discrimination in the exercise of police powers continued to be a concern. Data on fines issued for non-compliance with the COVID-19 related lockdown revealed that Black and Asian people were disproportionately fined. In May, during the first national lockdown, police in London conducted a record number of stop and searches: 43,644, of which 10,000 targeted young Black men. Racial disproportionality specifically against Black people continued to feature heavily across various policing issues, including the use of force and of Taser. Police figures published in 2020 showed that Black people were up to eight times more likely to have Taser used against them than White people in 2018/19. High-profile cases of Taser use against Black people in London and Manchester, including one case in the presence of a child, highlighted this issue.

FREEDOM OF ASSEMBLY

In June, police used excessive force against Black Lives Matter protesters in London, including the confinement of people to a narrow space (“kettling”) and the use of horses to disperse crowds. Police issued approximately 70 infringements of COVID-19 restrictions to peaceful protesters at Black Lives Matter demonstrations in Belfast and Derry-Londonderry and initiated criminal investigations against the organizers, relying on COVID-19 related enforcement powers that came into force on the eve of the protest. In December, the Northern Ireland Policing Board found policing of the protests to have been “potentially unlawful”, while the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland found it to have been “unfair” and “discriminatory”.

REFUGEES, ASYLUM-SEEKERS AND MIGRANTS
During the COVID-19 pandemic, the government failed to adequately modify immigration policies and practices to safeguard public health. People continued to be held in immigration detention for the purposes of removal from the UK, despite the heightened risk of infection in detention and obstacles to effecting removal. Asylum claims were required to be made in person.

Statutory exclusions or restrictions on access to employment, welfare, accommodation and health care for people subject to immigration control undermined their ability to protect themselves from the virus and maintain an adequate standard of living. The government resisted widespread calls to suspend the “no recourse to public funds” policy, which restricts access to benefits for many migrants, during the pandemic.

Parliament passed a new immigration law in November which granted exceptionally broad legislative powers to the Home Secretary and ended free movement rights under EU law. Children entitled to British citizenship continued to be prevented by government policy and practice from registering their entitlement. Children of EU nationals became particularly at risk because of their loss of free movement rights in the UK.

RIGHT TO HOUSING

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the government introduced some measures, albeit only short-term, to protect the right to housing. It suspended court proceedings for evictions in England and Wales from 27 March until 20 September and temporarily increased the minimum notice period prior to eviction for most tenants.

By September, 29,000 rough sleepers and other vulnerable people had been supported into accommodation during the pandemic, according to official figures. Homelessness charities reported a sharp increase in demand for their services since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.

RIGHTS OF LESBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, TRANSGENDER AND INTERSEX (LGBTI) PEOPLE

In February, the first same-sex marriages took place in Northern Ireland after the success in 2019 of a long-running campaign for marriage equality. Religious same-sex marriages were permitted from September, and the conversion of existing civil partnerships was allowed from December.

Amid growing transphobic rhetoric and fear-mongering in the media, the government’s proposed amendments to the outdated Gender Recognition Act in England and Wales fell short of human rights standards. A second consultation to reform gender recognition law in Scotland ended in March.

WOMEN’S RIGHTS

There was an increase in reported cases of domestic violence during the COVID-19 pandemic. The government lacked a fully coordinated plan to tackle the foreseeable risk of domestic violence during the pandemic and failed to provide sufficient and timely emergency funding for frontline services. None of the additional funding was ring-fenced for specialist services for ethnic minority women, despite an increase in referrals to these services. Migrant women whose immigration status excludes them from most government benefits faced compounded challenges in obtaining support for domestic violence.

The Domestic Abuse Bill lacked provisions to ensure safety and access to justice for migrant women. The bill did not meet the government’s stated intention of bringing domestic legislation in line with the Istanbul Convention, which the UK had yet to ratify.

The criminalization of sex work and denial of sex workers’ labour rights meant that they were particularly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and related measures. The government maintained a five-week waiting period for social security payments, despite previously acknowledging that it was a factor in some women resorting to sex work.

SEXUAL AND REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS

After the decriminalization of abortion in 2019, regulations governing the provision of abortion services in Northern Ireland took effect on 31 March. The government allowed both abortion pills to be taken at home during the COVID-19 pandemic in all regions of the UK except Northern Ireland, where a local temporary service providing early medical abortions began in April, allowing one abortion pill to be taken on health and social care premises, and the second one at home.

Whilst abortion services in Northern Ireland were legal and running to varying degrees, by year’s end the authorities had yet to formally commission abortion services that were adequately resourced, sustainable and fully accessible to all who need them.

NORTHERN IRELAND – LEGACY ISSUES

In March, the government issued proposals to address the legacy of the conflict in Northern Ireland which were not compatible with human rights standards and departed from commitments made in the 2014 Stormont House Agreement and subsequent government statements and agreements. The proposals would limit prosecutions of those suspected of criminal responsibility for crimes under international law and human rights violations and abuses during the decades-long conflict.

The government refused to launch a public inquiry into the murder of Patrick Finucane, a Belfast lawyer killed in 1989, despite a 2019 Supreme Court ruling, which found that his murder was not effectively investigated in line with human rights standards.

IRRESPONSIBLE ARMS TRANSFERS

The UK resumed issuing licences for military exports to Saudi Arabia in July, after a court ruling in June 2019 required the government to suspend new licensing of military equipment to Saudi Arabia.

In response to the excessive use of force against US Black Lives Matter protesters, members of parliament and several organizations, including Amnesty International, called on the UK to suspend exports of crowd control equipment, such as tear gas and rubber bullets, to US law enforcement agencies. In September, the government stated that it had re-assessed export licences of such equipment to the USA in response to these events and concluded there was “no clear risk” of misuse.

STATE OVERREACH

The Counter-Terrorism and Sentencing Bill proposed a major overhaul of the sentencing regime for counter-terrorism offences, including the removal of some key safeguards on the use of already concerning administrative control measures known as Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures (TPIMs). The proposed changes included lowering the standard of proof for the imposition of a TPIM.

IMPUNITY

In March, the government proposed a new law which would seriously restrict prosecutions for offences committed by British soldiers overseas, including torture and other ill-treatment as well as other crimes under international law. The proposed law would create a “presumption against prosecution” after five years.

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

Hearings to consider a US extradition request for Julian Assange began in February and resumed in September. Assange remained detained at Belmarsh prison and faced prosecution in the USA for the publication of disclosed documents as part of his work with Wikileaks. Amnesty International called on the USA to drop the charges and on the UK to halt his extradition to the USA where he would face a real risk of serious human rights violations.

Annual Report

0

Detention Action


We have added Detention Action to our links at the bottom of this site.  The organisation campaigns against the harsh detention regime operated in the UK which deprives people of their liberty often without reason at considerable cost to the Exchequer.

0

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑