NCADC on UKBA criteria for asylum decisions
Unheard Voices interviews Lisa Matthews of the National Coalition of Anti-Deportation Campaigns group (NCADC) about the criteria used by the UKBA to decide on whether to grant someone asylum. Matthews explains how an asylum application begins and talks about the culture of disbelief within the UKBA.
What happens when an asylum seeker applies for asylum and what criteria does the UKBA use?
Lisa Matthews, coordinator of NCADC, says there needs to be a culture change within the UKBA. She says there is very little training of those making asylum decisions and that they do not use the expert country reports avaliable to help them determine whether a country is safe or not.
Matthews claims that the UKBA make it harder for a case worker to give someone asylum than to refuse them asylum:
They should be given the confidence to make the right decision, rather than seeming under pressure to refuse people asylum.
Matthews also talks about the new rules on the use of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, the right to a private life:
Part of the weighing up decision had to be, ‘how would the public feel, knowing that this person had their Article 8 rights recognised and we hadn’t deported them’.
This is hugely worrying, as it isn’t a legal decision. We need to change that tabloid perception, not make court decisions that pander to that fear mongering.
You can read about how this rule was applied to an asylum seeker’s claim here and Matthews tells us more in a skype interview from her London office…
Unheard Voices approached the UKBA about the allegations made by NCADC
A UK Border Agency spokesperson said:
The UK has a proud record of offering sanctuary to those who need it. But those who we and the courts have found do not have a genuine need for our protection must return to their home country.