In a new twist an Immigration Court has faced a demand from IND that CAYR workers and friends of detained young refugees be punished for their support. The message below has alerted CAYR to this new more aggressive reaction from the Immigration Directorate.

Members of the CAYR Committee have consulted on this most recent turn and have agreed to attempt to raise this money from our supporters. The raising of finance by CAYR is an entirely new turn as to date no money has been requested from supporters. The Chair and Secretary have been asked to make this situation a part of an overall review of finance.

Some harsher judges may consider that there is significance in some of the contracts and service level agreements assigned to some of these NGO’s. Such critics might suspect that there is fear that the renewal of such arrangements might be jeopardised by a forceful stance on behalf of these children. A more sympathetic interpretation might be to recognise that the Consortium membership is drawn from large organisations with extensive agenda’s. The child welfare groups like the NSPCC, Barnardos and the Children’s Society to name three reach across child welfare issues of every sort which may somehow conflict with the very specific political needs of lone refugee children. The refugee specific organisation such as the Refugee Council may find similar conflict of priority for their more general refugee focused goals. The most generous and in my view most likely explanation for this inaction is that the Refugee Children’s Consortium has simply settled into being a bog standard QUANGO. Conferences, reports, meetings with VIP’s and little else. A group of well intentioned people from well intentioned organisations who ultimately are doing little but talking.

This inaction cannot continue. Member bodies of the RCC (a list is published on this site) must either urge action on the issue of these vulnerable young people through the RCC or they must stand aside from a moribund group and make clear and emphatic decisions as to whether or not to challenge these unfair regulations. This particular abuse of these children must be brought to a stop. A FULL STOP!

Looking at the question coldly and pragmatically children who arrive in this country without adult carers are the perfect match. Generally speaking they are at least teenagers and are nearing the end of their time in education. By definition, being without adult carers means they do not have any dependent relatives either younger or older. Finally the circumstances from which they have escaped has motivated these young people to contribute to the community in which they spent their formative years.

Three, four or more years in the life of a teenager is a long time. It can seem forever. During that time they become comfortable with where they are and who they are and settle in to being teenagers. One cannot underestimate the traumatic impact of being forcefully torn from the familiar and comfortable and sent to a strange and frightening place.

These young people who escaped on their own to this country had moved, while still children, from one value system to a totally different one. In many cases the place they came from had experienced a level of social breakdown that had moved to a point where there was little value system at all. In these circumstances they readily accept and adopted standards of liberty and law which enable them to be comfortable in the UK. Thus our value system has become their value system. In their formative years they have grown to love this country and the people in it whom they view as their friends and their community. They are a rare thing, positive teenagers. CAYR activists are familiar with this affection and are constantly amazed by how it persists after expulsion. In spite of this the options our brutal immigration policy has imposed on these young people, by expelling them to a now unfamiliar and frequently chaotic country, represents a real danger to them and to us.

Their first option is to try and survive and build a life such as it is. This is not easy, given that the reason for most of these young people to come to the UK was an issue of their safety in the region from which they came.

The second option is to engage with strong and apparently reliable people in the new community to which they have been expelled. Sadly in many of these communities the strong and reliable are frequently far from benign. The harsh reality is that fit young people (particularly fit young men) who understand the British way of life and speak English will be seen as a real potential resource for people who feel they have reason to be hostile to this country. Within unstable countries such as the ones these young people are being expelled to groups prepared to act aggressively against British people and interests are frequently led by these sorts of individuals. These Fagans of terror will be licking their lips at the potential activists being created by British expulsion policy. The possibility that two young men, one British born and a soldier and the other a lone refugee who once lived in and loved this country should be involved in each others deaths is quite horrifying. In a sensible world they might have been playing in the same local town football side.

This desperate scenario need not occur if the government views these children as deserving of the same care and affection as British born children.

Sadly, social work is seen by many as a relatively low status “profession”. This may contribute to the fact that where non-British children without adult carers are concerned the principle of paramouncy is constantly and continuously breached and qualified social workers are required by their employers to assist with and conspire in this breach.

The Immigration Acts are presumed to take precedence over the Children Act and other child welfare legislation. Thus actions proposed by a social worker as in a child’s best interest may be vetoed by the Immigration and Nationality Directorate (IND). Further the management of the social worker acting out of financial considerations or as directed by IND may instruct her/him to set aside the best interest of the child regardless of their professional principles. Further, as a result of this precedence for immigration regulations Social Services departments compel professional social workers to put aside their code of conduct and confidentiality and assist IND with the removal of lone young people. This includes the requirement (frequently for budget reasons) that the social worker provide confidential information about a child to the detriment of that child’s welfare.

The weakness of the social work “profession” prevents individual professionals from standing up against these professionally compromising pressures and results in social workers having to betray clients in a way that no lawyer or doctor would abide. It is essential that through their unions and professional bodies social workers fight back and recover their professional integrity. Neither the BMA nor the Law Society would tolerate their professional members being treated in or behaving in this way.

Asylum for Sayed Hashemi

Sayed Hashemi is a friend of Mahdi Hidari whose story and model letter were circulated last week by NCADC. Sayed was snatched with Mahdi on July 15th when Immigration Officers raided his shared home in Canterbury. Both young men were taken to Dover Port and then separated 5 days later when Sayed was moved to Colnbrook IRC away from his community in the Canterbury, Whitstable area. Mahdi has been released on bail to a Whitstable address and has removal directions for August 22nd.

Sayed has just been given a deportation date for Sunday August 13th to Afghanistan He is very anxious, particularly as he was in Colnbrook IRC a few months ago and says he was then injured by Immigration escorts when he resisted forced removal. An independent medical examination and photographs taken by Home Office Officials documented his injuries.

Sayed like Mahdi fled Afghanistan as an unaccompanied child five years ago. Sayed is from the province of Mazar-i Sharif. His family were persecuted as Uzbeks by the Taliban and his father and 4 brothers were detained and beaten. After this Sayed’s father arranged his flight from Afghanistan to the UK. Sayed arrived in Folkestone after a 3 month traumatic journey and was placed in Foster care in Whitstable.

Sayed studied at Whitstable Community College obtaining GCSES and A/S levels. The Head of the Community College and Sayed’s teacher have provided character references for Sayed ’s solicitor to send to the Home Office. Sayed ’s further studies at Canterbury College were disrupted by stress and lack of funding when his asylum claim was refused.

Sayed has lost touch with his family since leaving Afghanistan and does not know if they are in the country or even still alive. Like his friend Mahdi he will be at risk of further persecution from the local Commanders who have infiltrated the corrupt and ineffective police force in Kabul and will be extremely vulnerable without any family to shelter him.

Afghanistan is going through its worst violence since U.S.-led forces overthrew the Taliban government in 2001. Almost 1,800 people have been killed in attacks by Taliban, drug barons and operations by foreign forces this year. (Alert Net 04/08/06)

The NGO Human Rights Watch have also reported the resurgence of the Taliban in Afghanistan and the increase in suicide bombings and other civilian attacks. Six British soldiers have been killed in the last two months in Afghanistan. Yesterday a bomb in Panjwayi district killed 21 children and adults. Also yesterday four Canadian soldiers were killed and ten wounded in a roadside attack.

Sayed ambitions are to finish his education in the UK and find a good job so that when safe he could return to Afghanistan and contribute to rebuilding the country’s infrastructure.

However the Immigration Authorities have decided Sayed’s future, that he should be frightened, alone and destitute on the streets of Afghanistan.

Friends of Sayed and Mahdi are launching a campaign for both of them to remain in the UK with a stall in Whitstable High Street on Saturday August 5th. Local media who have shown concern and interest in the situation for young refugees who come without their families and face detention and deportation will cover this.

Community Action for Young Refugees (CAYR) and Kent Campaign to Defend Asylum Seekers (KCDAS) are supporting Sayed and Mahdi.

What you can do to help
Friends of Sayed Hashemi with the support of CAYR & KCDAS are organising a fax campaign to try and persuade Liam Byrne the Immigration Minister to change his mind about removing Sayed, model letter attached, (copy/amend/write your own version).
Fax No: 020 7035 4745 from outside the UK + 20 7035 4745

Please notify the campaign of any faxes sent:

For further information contact

Kate Adams
KCDAS
079 4096 4551
kadams314@hotmail.com

Councillor Wes Maclachlan, CAYR, 07761683494

Sayed’s Model Letter

Or send it to:
Liam Byrne, Minister for Immigration
Home Office, 3rd Floor, Peel Building
2 Marsham Street
London, SW1P 4DF

Please take time to notify the campaign of any letters/faxes sent:

For further information contact:
Kate Adams
Kent Campaign to Defend Asylum Seekers
079 4096 4551
Email

Kent Campaign to Defend Asylum Seekers
PO Box 192
Whitstable
Kent CT5 1WA

Immigration officers snatched Mahdi on July 15 when they raided the home of his friend who was also taken. Mahdi is detained at Dover Removal Centre.

Mahdi came to the UK as an unaccompanied aged 16 minor in 2002 and is a member of the Hazara tribe who are persecuted in Afghanistan and is a Shia Muslim, the minority faith. Mahdi says he fled Ghazni, Afghanistan after he was detained and ill treated by the Taliban. His father was a prominent member of Hizb-l-Wahdat, the principle Shia party in Afghanistan; the Hizbi- Nahzat Party who were assisting the Taliban murdered him in 2000. Following this the Taliban raided Mahdi’s family home and took him, accusing him of working for his father’s party and spying for them, which he denied.

Mahdi’s family paid a large ransom for his release. Three weeks later Mahdi was accused of informing on a high-ranking member of the Hizb-i Wahdat party, Khadeem Ahmadi. Khadeem was arrested, taken to Kandahar and never seen again. Khadeem’s family then made death threats against Mahdi and harassed his mother. Mahdi’s uncle then arranged for his passage to the UK via an agent.

Mahdi attended his asylum appeal hearing as a 16 year old without an accompanying adult. The Home Office were not represented and the adjudicator took the view that Mahdi was not a credible witness. Unfortunately Mahdi’s solicitors did not appeal the decision.

Mahdi’s current legal team countered this. Dr.Antonio Glustozzi a research fellow at the London School of Economics prepared evidence for Mahdi’s appeal against his deportation. Dr Glustozzi is an expert on private militias in Afghanistan and worked as a Political Affairs Officer in Kunduz and Mazar-i Sharif for the United Nations Assistance Mission to Afghanistan. Dr.Glustozzi argued that weakness and corruption in the police force in Kabul and a lack of cooperation in Hazara neighbourhood’s means that former commanders who are part of the Hizb-i Wahdt network enforce security. Mahdi would therefore not receive protection from the family of Khadeem Ahmadi if they discovered his whereabouts. Additionally international troops do not protect those in the poorer neighbourhoods where Hazaras live. As a perceived traitor Madhi would also be at risk of persecution from the Commander of the Hizbi-i Wahdat party as Commanders have a vested interest in punishing those who are seen to have violated the rules because their power is derived from intimidation.

Despite this compelling evidence Mahdi’s appeal against his deportation was refused.

A recent letter from the Red Cross confirms that Mahdi’s mother has died since he left Afghanistan and his brother and sister are now in Iran so he has no family to shelter him.

The situation in Afghanistan is deteriorating daily. A report by Human Rights Watch dated May 2006 documents the corruption in the Police Force. They expressed, “serious concern” about the appointment of Kabul’s police chief, Jamil Jumbish who Has been implicated in, “murder torture, intimidation, bribery ” He has currently been investigated by the Afghan Government for the involvement in the torture and death of two men in his custody. Another report by Human Rights Watch confirms the killing of three students at Kabul University after a protest about poor living conditions, more than 20 others were shot and injured. Human Rights Watch describe the rising insecurity in Afghanistan as the Taliban are resurging and groups opposed to the Government use tactics such as suicide bombings, attacks on schools and other civilian targets to achieve their ends. Attacks, which Human Rights Watch, cite as “Serious violations of humanitarian law ” in fact “War Crimes”.

Mahdi has integrated well and was studying IT at Canterbury College where he had passed several GCSES. Mahidi’s lecturer Debbie Haith supported his application for Indefinite Leave to Remain. Mahdi is an able student who had hoped to progress to
A- levels but in May 2005 his accommodation and subsistence from Social Services was terminated. He has only been saved from destitution by the kindness of friends. Mahdi’s supporters are standing surety and providing him with a bail address. They have set up a campaign to fight for his release from detention and against his deportation.