Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal - London Hearing November 2018 ... · The following sub-articles of...

PermanentPeoples’Tribunal-LondonHearingNovember2018OntheViolationsoftheHumanRightsofMigrantandRefugeePeoples Page1

1

PermanentPeoples’Tribunal-LondonHearingNovember2018

OntheViolationsoftheHumanRightsofMigrantandRefugeePeoples

October20181.PreambleThissessioncallsonthePermanentPeoples’TribunaltoconsiderwhetherthepoliciesoftheEuropeanUnionanditsmemberstatesinthefieldofimmigrationandasylum,particularlyastheyaffectmigrantpeoplesinthechainoflabour,amounttoseriousviolations of the articles enshrined in the Universal Declaration of the Rights ofPeoples signed in Algiers on 4 July 1976, to serious violations of the rights ofindividualsasenshrinedinparticularintheUniversalDeclarationofHumanRights1948,and,intheirtotality,toacrimeagainsthumanitywithinthemeaningofArt.7oftheRomeStatute.The current indictment is presented as one of a series of indictments against thegovernments of the global North within the framework set out at the introductoryhearinginBarcelonainJuly2017.Theseindictmentstakentogethersetoutthewaysinwhich the governments of the global North and the institutions of the EU have (a)created conditions making life unsustainable for millions in the global South, thuscausingmassforcedmigration;(b)treatedthosemigratingtotheglobalNorthasnon-persons, by denying them the rights owed to all humans by virtue of their commonhumanity, including rights to life,dignityand freedom; (c) createdzoneswhichare inpracticeexcludedfromtheruleoflawandhumanrightswithintheglobalNorth.Governmentsof theglobalNorth, togetherwiththe international financial institutions,pursue trade, investment, financial, foreign relations, and development policieswhichuphold a system of global exploitation that destabilises governments, causes armedconflict, degrades the environment and impoverishes and immiserates workers andcommunities intheglobalSouth, therebyforcingmillionsto leavetheirhomestoseeksafety,securityandlivelihoodelsewhere.

At the same time, through policies of deregulation, privatisation, welfare stateretrenchment and outsourcing of government functions, marketisation and


2

flexibilisation,therestructuringofworkandlabourrelationshavebeenenabledintheglobal North, creating acute insecurity and precarity, depressing real wages andconditionsofworkformostworkers.Through labourandmigrationpolicieswhichpermit freedomofmovement forcapitaland forcitizensof theglobalNorthwhiledenyingsuch freedomsto thecitizensof theglobal South, their governments have allowed employers to take advantage of thevulnerabilityofmigrantsandrefugeesastheyattempttoenterthelabourmarket,whichhascreatedamigrantandrefugeeunderclassofillegalised,super-exploited,deportableworkers–apeoplewithoutrights.Migrants, people forced to move from the global South to the global North for reasons of war, conflict, persecution, dispossession and poverty, suffer violations of rights with impunity when they reach the global North regardless of their particular nationality or ethnicity. By virtue of their common experience they can be said to constitute a ‘people’ for the purposes of the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Peoples (the Algiers Declaration), which provides that every people has a right to existence, and that no one shall be subjected, because of his national or cultural identity, to … persecution, deportation, expulsion or living conditions such as may compromise the identity or integrity of the people to which s/he belongs. The following sub-articles of Art. 7 of the Rome Statute (crimes against humanity) are relevant to the considerations of the Tribunal: c) Enslavement; d) Forced deportation or transfer of the population; e)Imprisonmentandotherseriousformsofdenialofpersonalfreedominviolationoffundamentalnormsofinternationallaw;g)Rape,sexualslavery,forcedprostitution…andotherformsofsexualviolenceofequalseriousness;h)Persecutionagainstagrouporacollectivepossessingtheirownidentity,inspiredbyreasonsofapolitical,racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious or gender-based nature; i) Forceddisappearancesofpeople; j)Apartheid; k)Other inhumanacts of the samenatureaimed at intentionally causing great suffering or serious prejudice to the physicalintegrityortophysicalormentalhealth.Other relevant human rights instruments engaged by the indictment include: TheUniversalDeclarationonHumanRights(1948);The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (1966), the Convention for the Suppression of the Traffic in Persons and of the Exploitation of the Prostitution of Others, the Protocol to Punish Trafficking in Persons, especially Women and Children; the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment; the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Racial Discrimination; the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination against Women; the Convention on the Rights of the Child; the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (2000); the ILO Migration for Employment Convention (Revised) (1949), all of which have been ratified by EU member states.


3

Withinthisframework,thecurrentindictmentasksthePermanentPeoples’Tribunaltoconsidertheeconomic,security,migrationandlabourpoliciesoftheEUanditsmemberstates, which together exclude, marginalise and deny basic human rights to poormigrantsandrefugeesbothatthebordersandwithinEurope.IntheUK,thesepoliciesarecollectivelyknownasthe‘hostileenvironment’,policieswhichhavetheavowedaimofmakinglifeimpossibleformigrantsandrefugeeswhodonothavepermissiontoliveintheUK,andwhichremovesuchmigrantsfromtherightstohousing,health,livelihoodandadecentstandardofliving,liberty,freedomofassemblyandassociation,familyandprivate life, physical and moral integrity, freedom from inhuman or degradingtreatment,andinthefinalanalysistherighttohumandignityandtolife.TheTribunalwill alsobe requested to examine the legal infrastructurewhichunderlies the ‘hostileenvironment’, inwhichmigrantsandrefugees,withorwithoutpermissiontobeinthecountry, are in practice possessed of no rights, but at best privileges which can bewithdrawnatanytime.While the ‘hostile environment’ policies have features particular to the UK, there areparallel provisions in other EU member states, which deny undocumented migrantsaccess to housing, health care, employment and livelihood. Such policies areparadigmatic of the EU-wide treatment of poormigrants and refugees as undesirableand undeserving of human rights. This contempt findsmultiple expressions, from thecriminalisation of rescue in the Mediterranean, to the maintenance of inhuman anddegradingconditionsatrefugeecampsfromMoriainGreecetoCalais,France.Itspreadsdownwards from government and encourages the growth ofmore andmore extremeanti-immigrantracismandviolence.Thenotebelowsetsoutsomeofthefeaturesofthe ‘hostileenvironment’ formigrantsdevelopedaspolicyintheUKsince2012,withtheirhistoricalroots.2.Explanatorynote:the‘hostileenvironment’In2012, theUKhomesecretaryTheresaMay said that sheplanned to createa ‘reallyhostileenvironment’ forillegal immigrantsintheUK,sotheywouldleavethecountry.Inthewakeofherannouncement,shesetupaninter-ministerial ‘HostileEnvironmentWorking Group’ (a title later changed, at the request of coalition partners ingovernment, to ‘Inter-ministerial group on migrants’ access to benefits and publicservices’, taskedwithdevisingmeasureswhichwouldmake lifeasdifficultaspossibleforundocumentedmigrantsandtheirfamiliesintheUK.Theexplicitintentionisthustoweaponisetotaldestitutionandright-lessness,soastoforcemigrantswithouttherighttobeinthecountrytodeportthemselves,atlowornocosttotheUK.The policies which this group devised were contained in the 2014 and 2016ImmigrationActs,insecondarylegislationandguidancedocuments,andinoperationalmeasuresadoptedbytheHomeOfficeandpartneragencies.Theyinclude:(1) Housing: The ‘right to rent’requires private landlords to perform immigrationchecksonprospectivetenants,theirfamiliesandanyoneelsewhomightbelivingwiththem. Landlords renting property are liable to penalties and potentially toimprisonmentifsomeonewithoutpermissiontobeintheUKisfoundlivingasatenantor lodger in their property. The right to rent was piloted in 2014 andwas extendedthroughoutthecountryin2016,despitean(unpublished)HomeOfficesurveyindicatingitwasnotworkingandwasleadingtogreaterracialdiscriminationinthehousingrentalmarket, findings confirmed by civil society organisations and landlords’ associations(JointCouncilfortheWelfareofImmigrants,2015,2017).


4

ThosewhocannotprovetheircitizenshiporstatusintheUK,andareunabletoaccessrentedproperty andhaveendeduphomeless andon the streets, includea significantnumberofpensionerswhohave lived in theUK since early childhood (the ‘Windrushgeneration’).Acts of parliament in 1996 and 1999 had excluded asylum seekers, undocumentedmigrants andmigrantson temporaryworkvisas fromhomelesspersons’housingandsocial housing tenancies (the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 created a separateagency to provide destitute asylum seekers with no-choice accommodation outsideLondonandthesouth-east).The ‘right to rent’ measures breach the right to adequate housing withoutdiscrimination, which is recognised in the Universal Declaration on Human Rights(UDHR)Art25(asanintegralpartoftherighttoanadequatestandardofliving),andinArt11oftheInternationalCovenantonEconomic,SocialandCulturalRights(ICESCR),furtheramplifiedbyGeneralCommentNo4onAdequateHousingbytheUNCommitteeonEconomic,SocialandCulturalRights(1991). Insofarashomelesslessaffectshumandignityandphysicalandmentalintegrity,themeasuresalsobreachArt1UDHR,Arts3and8oftheEuropeanConventiononHumanRights(ECHR)andArts1and3oftheEUCharterofFundamentalRights(EUCFR).(2)Healthcare:Arequirement forNationalHealthServicehospitalstaff tocheck theimmigrationstatusofallthoseattendingfornon-emergencytreatment,andtodemandfullpaymentinadvancefromthoseunabletoshowtheirentitlementtofreetreatment,was implemented through regulations which came into force in April 2017. Thoseunable to establish their lawful status in the UK and those with visitor status arecharged150per centof the costof treatment. Emergency treatmentdoesnot requireadvance payment but patients are invoiced later for it. The regulations followedrestrictionsonfreehospitaltreatmentin2015,sincewhenthoseintheUKasstudentsor with work visas have been required to pay an annual health levy (now £400 perpersonperyear).Theyhaveresulted inmanyexpectantmothersnotattendingforante-natal treatment,causinglastingdamagetotheirunbornchildren,andtocancerpatientsandotherswithveryseriousconditionsbeingunabletostarttreatmentforlackoffunds.TheHealthandSocialCareActof2012allowedtheNHStopassondetailsofpatientstotheHomeOfficeforenforcement,andinformalarrangementsforsuchdatasharingwerereplacedbya formalagreement (MoU) in January2017.Afterdoctors’groupssuchastheBritishMedicalAssociation(BMA),medicalcharitiesincludingDoctorsoftheWorld,campaign groups such as Docs not Cops and members of parliament in the selectcommittee on health called on the government to end the agreement, which wasdeterringsickpeopleandexpectantmothersfromseekingmedicalhelp,thegovernmentannouncedapartialsuspensionoftheMoUinApril2018.NHS Regulations had from 1982 onwards provided that visitors to the UK were notentitledtofreenon-emergencyhospitaltreatment,althoughNHSstaffwerenotobligedtochargeortoperformimmigrationstatuschecksandmostdidnot.Primaryhealthcare(at doctors’ surgeries) remains free to all regardless of status, as attempts bygovernment toextendthechargingregimetoprimarycarehavemetwithverystrongresistancefromNHSandpublichealthworkers.


5

The denial of free hospital treatment to those in need, who cannot prove theirimmigrationstatusordonothavesecurestatus,and/ormeasureswhichdeterpeoplefrom seeking medical treatment, violate the right to the enjoyment of the highestattainable standard of physical and mental health, which is one of the fundamentalrightsofeveryhumanbeing,withoutdistinctionofrace,religion,politicalbelieforsocialor economic condition. It is reflected in the 1946 Constitution of the World HealthOrganisation, inArt 25UDHRand inArt 12 ICESCR1966. It also violates the right tophysicalandmentalmoralintegrityrecognizedinArt8ECHRandArt3EUCFR.(3)CriminalisingworkThe2016ImmigrationActcontinuedandperfectedtheprocessof criminalisation of migrants’ work which had started two decades before, when in1996,thebanonworkforasylumseekersandforthosewithoutpermissiontobeinthecountry began to be enforced by employer sanctions: penalties for employers whoemployedthosewithoutauthorisationtoworkintheUK.Whilethelawwashardlyused,itpavedthewayformuchstrictersanctionsin2006,withthecreationofacriminal(asopposedtoaregulatory)offenceofknowinglyemployingunauthorisedworkers,whichcarriedaprisonsentence; increasedregulatorypenalties;stricterdocumentarychecksfor employers to avoid penalties; and intensive enforcement through raids onmainlysmall, ethnic-owned workplaces. In 2016, the penalty was doubled to £20,000 perworker, and a new criminal offence of illegal working was created, which enabledundocumentedworkers’wagestobeconfiscated.OpportunitiesforlegalworkintheUKhavebeencloselytailoredtothedemandsoftheeconomysincethepost-secondworldwarreconstruction.Fromthe1971ImmigrationAct onwards, unskilled workers from outside the EU were not admitted, apart fromgroups such as seasonal agricultural workers and domestic workers - temporaryworkers with no rights of settlement or family unity, controlled entirely by theiremployersandnotpermittedtochangeemployer.Asylumseekerswerenotpermittedtoworkwhiletheywaitedfortheircasestobedetermined,aprocesswhichcouldtakeyears.Visasforworkhavelargelybeenrestrictedtothosewithahighlevelofeducation,qualification and income (and since 2009, under the points-based system, points arealso awarded for youth). In 2010, graduates were no longer permitted as before toremainintheUKfortwoyearsforpost-studywork.As from2016, too, immigrationruleswerechangedtoremoverightstosettlement forthose earningunder £35,000per year. Thismeasurewas introduced so as to ensurethat‘onlythebrightestandbestworkerswhostrengthentheUKeconomy’areallowedtosettlepermanently in theUK; theothersarenowrequired to leave theUKaftersixyears. The rationale for the rule changes is thus unashamedly neoliberal and nativist,treatingtheworkersconcernedasdisposablecommodities.Atthesametime,whileEUnationalshaverightstomovefreelyaroundtheEUforwork,homelessEUnationals fromeasternEurope foundsleepingrough inLondonhavehadtheiridentitydocumentsconfiscated,whichpreventsthemfromobtainingemployment,and they have found themselves detained and deported for ‘abuse’ of freemovementrights.ThesemeasuresbreachtherighttoworkrecognisedasuniversalbyArt23UDHR,andenshrinedinArt6ICESCRandArt15(1)EUCFR.


6

Theyshouldbeseenagainstthebackgroundinwhichthegovernmentsandinstitutionsof theEUandof theglobalNorthhaveabdicatedtheir international lawobligationstoprotect workers and ensure decent working conditions and fair pay, enabling theentrenchmentofexploitativelabourpracticesandoppressivelabourconditionsinboththepublicandtheprivatesector.IntheUK,thegovernmenthasrepeatedlyrefusedpayrisestopublicsectorworkerswhileallowingmanagerstotakeobscenelyhighsalaries;refused to adopt a genuine living wage; failed to enforce minimum wage and otherlabourprotectionvigorously;andhasencouragedorcondonedcompanies’useofzero-hours contracts, their manipulation of ‘self-employed’ status, agency working,undermining of the right to organise and other actions which deny rights andprotectionstoworkersandemployees.These acts and omissions breach the right to just and favourable conditions of workprotectedbyArt23UDHR,andtofreedom,equity,safetyandsecurityatwork,contrarytotheConventionsoftheInternationalLabourOrganisation(ILO).1(4)Socialsecurityandasylumsupport:MigrantsadmittedtotheUKforvisits,work,studyorfamilyreunionaresubjecttoaconditionof‘norecoursetopublicfunds’whichprohibits access tomeans-tested benefits. Since 1999, they have been disqualified bysocialsecurityregulationsfromaccesstoanysuchbenefits.Asylumseekersareeligible to receiveabout£37perweek (anamountwhich in2014represented around 50 percent of basic income support). The level of support wasbased on the assumption that the determination periodwould be around sixmonths,since itwasaccepted thatnoonecould liveon thisamount for longer.Theperiod fordetermination of claims is frequentlymeasured in years rather thanmonths, but theamounthasnot risen in linewith livingcosts.Supportwasdenied to lateandrefusedclaimants in 1996 and again by legislation in 2002. and in 2009 the removal of basicbenefitsandaccommodationwasextendedtofamilieswithchildrenwhodidnotleavethe UK when required to. Those eligible for asylum support often have to wait forseveralweeksormonthstoobtainit,leavingmanyhomelessandutterlydestitute.In 2007 the Joint Parliamentary Committee onHumanRights condemned the level ofand exclusions from asylum support as ‘enforced destitution’, which ‘in a number ofcasesreachesthethresholdofinhumananddegradingtreatment’.Itconcludedthatthe‘deliberate policy of destitution falls below the requirements of the common law ofhumanityandofinternationalhumanrightslaw.’A2014reportbyIRIS,Povertyamongrefugees and asylum seekers in the UK. An evidence and policy review, found thatdestitution was a deliberate policy calculated as a deterrent to others consideringcomingtotheUK.Measures deliberately depriving anyone of the means of life breach Arts 9 and 11ICESCR (right to social security and to an adequate standard of living), andmay alsoconstitute inhumananddegradingtreatmentcontrary toArt5UDHR,Art3ECHRandArt4EUCFR.

1InsofarastheILOMigrationforEmploymentConventionandtheEUCharterofFundamentalRights’requirementsofdecentandsafeworkingconditionsapplyonlytoworkerslawfullyontheterritory,theseinstrumentsthemselvesunjustifiablyandwronglyentrenchtheexclusionofundocumentedmigrantsfromrightsrecognisedasuniversal.


7

(5)Education:InJune2015theDepartmentforEducation(DfE)enteredanagreementwith theHomeOffice topassondetailsof schoolpupilsobtained through the schoolscensus, toenable theHomeOffice to traceunlawfully staying families fordeportation.Theagreement,whoseaimsincludedthecreationofa‘hostileenvironment’inschools,wassecret,andonlycametolightinDecember2016,aftertheDfEaddedquestionsonnationalityandcountryofbirthtothecensus.Aproposalbythehomesecretarynottopermitchildrenofmigrantswithirregularstatustoattendschoolortopushthemtothebackofthequeueforschoolplaces,wasrejectedbythegovernment.ApubliccampaignbyactivistgroupAgainstBordersforChildren,supportedbyteachersandparents,ledtothedroppingofthenationalityandcountryofbirthquestionsfromtheschoolcensusinApril2018,butthedatasharingagreementremainsinforce,andcampaignersbelieveitdetersthosewithirregularstatusfromsendingtheirchildrentoschool.Insofarasthemeasuresarecalculatedtodeterparentsfromsendingchildrentoschool,they breach the universal right to education without discrimination, recognised by(inter alia) Art 26 UDHR, Arts 13 and 14 ICESCR, Protocol 1 Art 2 of the EuropeanConventiononHumanRights,(ECHR),Art14EUCFRandArt28UNConventionontheRightsoftheChild(UNCRC).(6) Other data sharing measures: Apart from the measures described above inrelation to theNHSandschools, the2016 ImmigrationAct imposedageneraldutyonpublic bodies and others to share data and documents with the Home Office forimmigration enforcement. In addition, from January2018bankshavebeenobliged toconduct quarterly checks on current account holders and to close accounts of thosesuspectedbytheHomeOfficeofunlawfulstay.TheseprovisionsweresuspendedinMay2018.PowerstosharedatawithandtorequiretheprovisionofinformationtotheHomeOfficebyothergovernmentdepartmentsandagencies, includingHerMajesty’sRevenueandCustoms, marriage registrars and local authorities,were granted by legislation from1999on.From2009,universitiesandcollegeswereobligedtocollectandtransmittotheHomeOfficethepersonaldetails,attendance,progressandotherrelevantinformationonnon-EUstudentsenrolledoncourses,aswellastocheckthedocumentsofallstaffincludingvisiting lecturers. Failure to monitor students led to suspension and in some caseswithdrawaloftheirlicencetoenrolnon-EUstudents.The Data Protection Act 2018 exempts data collected and shared for immigrationcontrol purposes from rights of data subjects to access the data held on them, to theextentthatdisclosuremayprejudiceimmigrationcontrol.Thesemeasures disproportionately interferewith rights to privacy (Art 8 ECHR) anddataprotection(Art8EUCFR).(7) Commercial fees: Home Office fees for visas and their renewal have risenexponentially in recent years, to reflect ‘the value of the product’, which makesapplicationsforsettlement,forregularisationorforcitizenshipprohibitivelyexpensive.Anapplicationforsettledstatusforawomansubjectedtodomesticviolencebyaspousecosts£2,997;foradependentrelativeitnowcosts£3,250.ChildrenbornintheUK,whoareentitledtoregisterasBritishaftertenyears’residence,arerequiredtopayafeeofover£1,000,whilethosearrivingintheUKasyoungchildrenwillhavetofindvisafees,includingthehealthsurcharge,amountingto£8,500overtenyears.


8

Insofarasthesehighfeespreventmigrantsfromregularizingtheirstatus,theyinterferewithrightstoprivatelifeprotectedbyArt8ECHRandArt7EUCFR.The cumulative effect of the abovemeasures, in particular the denial of the right towork in lawfulemployment, theexclusionofmigrants fromall social securitybenefitsand the exorbitant fees for immigration applications, is to drive many migrants intoillegalemployment,wheretheyarewhollyatthemercyofemployers,subjecttoabusesranging fromsexualharassment tonon-paymentofwages,andwithno legal recoursebecauseoftheirstatus,violatingrightstoaccesstojusticeandtoaneffectiveremedyforthebreachofrights(Arts2,7UDHR,Arts6,13ECHR,Art47EUCFR).Non-EUworkerswithout regular status are excluded from access to workplace rights, minimumwageandotherprotections.Women,whomakeup a highproportionof theseworkers, areput at riskof sexual exploitationandabuse in addition toother formsof exploitation,whichalsodirectlyandindirectlyaffectchildrenandyoungpeople.(8)Familylife:Immigrationruleswerechangedin2012sothatregularmigrantsfromoutsidetheEUwhoearnunder£18,600arenotentitledtohavetheirspouseorpartnerjointhem,andtheymustearn£22,400tobringachildaswell,andafurther£2,400foreachadditionalchild.The rule changewasunnecessary, sincemigrants seeking tobring in familymemberswerealreadyrequiredtoshowthattheycouldaccommodateandsupportthemwithoutrecourse topublic funds. It isdesigned toensure thatpoorpeoplecannothave familylifeintheUK.The‘deportfirst,appeallater’measuresinthe2014and2016ImmigrationActsallowedfor the removal from thecountryofmigrantswhowereappealingon theground thatremovalwouldbreachtheirrighttorespectfortheirfamilylife,beforetheappealwasheard.Manycaseshavebeenreportedwhereyoungchildrenasyoungassixmonthsoldhavebeenseparatedfromtheirparentsbyparents’detention.BailforImmigrationDetainees(BID)hasrepresented155parentsseparatedfromtheirchildrenbydetentionsofarin2018.The measures interfere with the right to respect for family life, protected by manyhuman rights instruments includingUNCRC andArt 8 ECHR. Interferencewith familylife isonlypermitted inhumanrights law if it is lawfulandnecessary inademocraticsociety forpublicsafety, thepreventionofcrime,theprotectionof therightsofothersetc.(9) Policing and detention: In 2012, Operation Nexus was launched, a joint police-immigration enforcement operation which relied on police intelligence rather thanfindingsofguilt to identify ‘high-harm’ individuals fordeportation.Thefollowingyear,the government launched Operation Vaken, an attempt to frighten undocumentedmigrants into leaving the country, with billboard vans driving around migrant areastellingthemto ‘GoHome!Or facearrest’, simultaneouslywithanaggressiveoperationinvolvingimmigrationchecksonminorityyouthsatLondontubestations.


9

Enforcement became an important priority in the late 1990s and2000s. Enforcementofficialsgrewfrom120in1993to7,500in2009,whenthousandsofaggressiveraidsonethnic businesses and homes took place. A notorious operation in 2009, whichillustrates the relationship between lack of workplace rights and insecure residencerights, involved an ambush on cleaners at the School of Oriental and African Studies(SOAS)inLondon,whohadjustwontheLondonlivingwagefollowingahardcampaign.Invited to an early morning meeting, the cleaners found themselves locked in byimmigration officials who checked their entitlement to work in the UK and arrestedseveral for deportation. Despite solidarity actions by students, nine were deported.Howeverthecleanersandtheirsupporterscontinuedtheircampaignforjusttreatmentandin2017,theywontherighttobeemployeddirectlybytheschool,givingthemequalpayandconditionswiththeschool’sotherworkers.The UK is the only EU member state where indefinite administrative detention ofmigrants is legal under domestic law, and many immigration detainees have beenlocked up for several years. There has been a strong campaign, involving manyparliamentarians, for a 28-day detention limit. On many occasions, judges havecondemnedthelengthydetentionofvulnerablepeople,andseveraltimeshaveruleditinhumananddegrading.Indefinitedetentioncausesmental illnessandseveredistress,andhasresultedinnumeroussuicidesandepisodesofself-harm.The UK was an early privatiser of immigration detention, with HarmondsworthdetentioncentrerunbySecuricorinthe1970s.Sevenoftheeightlong-termdetentioncentres(nownamed‘immigrationremovalcentres’orIRCs)areprivatelyrun.Theyareexempt from minimum wage legislation, and in 2018, centre managers refused toincreasethepayofdetaineesdoingmenialworktherefrom£1to£1.15perhour.Thesemeasuresviolaterightstoliberty,proclaimedasapeculiarlyBritishfundamentalrightandvaluebyjudges,andalsoseenasfundamentalintheUDHRandtheECHR;todecent conditions ofwork (see above); and to freedom from inhuman and degradingtreatment.(10)Thehostileenvironmentat theborders:AsEurope closes itsborders topoormigrantsandrefugees,informalcampshavesprungupattheborderbottlenecks,wherelittleornoofficialhelphasbeenprovided,volunteersseekingtoprovidehelphavebeencriminalised and harsh policing measures have been deployed, including beatings,attackswithdogs,andtheftordestructionofbelongings.AtCalais,wheremigrantsandrefugeeshopingtocrosstheChanneltoBritainhavebeenarrivingsincethe1990s,theirencampmentshavebeenrepeatedlydestroyed.Thebigcampknownasthe‘jungle’,withmakeshiftchurch,schoolandshops,wasbulldozedinOctober2016andpoliceroutinelyspraysleepingchildrenwithteargasanddestroytheirtentsandsleepingbags,andbeatoldermigrants,whiletheCalaismayor,seekingtopreventanother‘jungle’encampment,bannedtheunauthoriseddistributionoffoodandcleanwaterdespitediseasessuchastrenchfootdevelopingforlackofcleanwater.(Thebanwasoverruledbyacourtwhichordered the installationof taps for drinking andwashingwater.)TheUKgovernmentcontributestothecostofpolicingmigrantsinCalais.Theharsh treatmentof those in theencampmentsandat theborders is inhumananddegrading treatment, contrary to Art 3 ECHR, whose protection is designed to beabsolute.Suchtreatmentcanneverbejustifiedbyanypolicyobjective.


10

3. Specific charges against the UK government (in its own right and asrepresentativeoftheEUandmemberstatesandtheglobalNorth)

1. Withinaworkforceimpoverishedandrenderedinsecurebyneoliberalpolicies,

ithasensuredthatmigrantandrefugeeworkersoftenremainsuper-exploited,marginalised and deprived of rights by legal and operational measuresincluding:

(i) Failure(incommonwithvirtuallythewholeoftheglobalNorth)tosign

orratifytheUNMigrantWorkers’Convention;(ii) Failure (unlikemanyother states in theGlobalNorth) to ratify the ILO

DomesticWorkers’ Convention, and the removal of rights and securityfromdomesticworkers;

(iii) Legislation imposing employer sanctions for bosses employingundocumentedworkers,enforcedbyviolentraidson,inparticular,smallethnic minority employers, who can be fined up to £20,000 and evenimprisonedforemployinganundocumentedmigrantorrefugeeworker;

(iv) The creation of the criminal offence of illegal working, under theImmigration Act 2016, which allows for the confiscation of workers’wages;

(v) Thedenialand/orrestrictionofrightstoworkforasylumseekers;(vi) Maintenance of a legal framework which excludes undocumented

workers from protection against abuses including non-payment ofwages, unfair dismissal and race and sex discrimination, which areparticularly rife in the hospitality, leisure, service, agriculture andconstructionsectors;

(vii) Failure to provide sufficient ongoing funding for the Gangmasters andLabourAbuseAuthority(GLAA)toenforcedecentconditionsofwork;

(viii) Failure to provide legal aid in employment-related cases, and theremovalofpublicfundingforadviceandassistanceinthesecases;

(ix) Failure to ensure complete separation of enforcement visits by GLAAfromimmigrationenforcement;

(x) RemovalofEuropeanEconomicArea(EAA)nationalswhoaredestituteandwhocannotfindwork;

(xi) The exemption of immigration removal centres from minimum wagelegislation, enabling multinational security companies to profit bothfromthedetentioncontractsandfromthecheaplabourofdetainees.

2. Meanwhile, the government’s policieswith regard to immigration and asylum

havefosteredracism,Islamophobiaandnativism,andhavedeliberatelycreateda ‘hostile environment’ for non-citizens which involves (in addition to thecriminalisationof work) enforced destitution, denial of rights to housing andessentialmedicaltreatment,indefinitedetentionanddeportation.Thesepoliciesviolateinternationalhumanrightsobligationstoprotectrightstolife,todignity,tophysicalandpsychological integrity, torespect forprivateandfamily life, toliberty,andtoprotectionfromforced labourandfrominhumananddegradingtreatment.Thishasbeenachievedthrough:

(i) Increasinglyrestrictivevisapolicieswhichlimitlegalrightstoenterand

stay in the UK for work (for non-EEA or third-country nationals) to asmall and diminishing number of highly qualified or corporateemployees,withextortionatefeesforissueandrenewal;

(ii) ImmigrationrulesandHomeOfficepolicywhichtreatdomesticworkersasthepropertyoftheiremployers;


11

(iii) The provision of no-choice, often squalid asylum accommodation toasylumseekers,whoarerequiredtoliveonanimpossiblysmallweeklyallowance;

(iv) Legislationrequiringprivatelandlordsandagentstocheckimmigrationstatusbeforerentingoutaccommodation;

(v) Legislation and policy that denies most refused asylum seekers, andundocumentedmigrants,anybenefitsorsupport,aswellasanyexceptemergencyNHShospitalcare;

(vi) Theentrenchmentofracialisedviewpointsaboutmigrantsinthecontrolsystem to the point that people of colour resident for decades areexposed to the suspicion of having no lawful right to reside, deniedessentialservices,andthreatenedwithenforcedremoval;

(vii) Theremovaloflegalaidfornon-asylumimmigrationcases;

3. Thegovernment,bypolicieswhichmake it impossible to livewithoutworking

and simultaneously making work illegal, forces vulnerable people to acceptconditionsofsuper-exploitationandtotalinsecurityasthepriceofremaininginthe country, and enables private companies to profit from such super-exploitation.

4. Additionally,whileEU freemovement lawrecognises the importanceof family

unity for EEA nationals whomove in order to work, the government’s familyreunionrules fornon-EEAnationals(whethertheyareadmittedasworkersoras refugees) are extremely restrictive and result in long-term separation offamilies.

5. These policies also work to the detriment of the rights of children, who are

exposedtorisksofexploitationandabusewhentheyattempttomigrateintheirown right, or to hardship and destitution as a consequence of policies whichdenypublicfundssupporttofamilymigrants.

6. Atthesametime,thegovernment,initsownrightandasanEUmemberstate,

facilitatesthemakingofvastprofitsbysecuritycorporationsthroughcontractsfor the border security regime, the housing of asylum seekers and for thedetention and deportation of migrants, while overlooking or condoningbrutality,racismandotherhumanrightsviolations,criminaloffences,fraudandnegligence, committed by their agents against migrants and refugees, in factrewardingthemthroughthecontinuingawardofsuchcontracts.

QuestionsfortheTribunalTheTribunal is asked to consider the cumulative effect of all thesemeasures, policiesand operations taken together, in creating and maintaining a people without rightswithinEuropeandatitsborders.

(a) TotheextentthattheTribunalfindstheaboveviolationsproved,howtotheyfitwith the general pattern of violations found by the Tribunal in its hearings atBarcelona,PalermoandParis?

(b) How does the creation and maintenance of a rightless people sit with thepretensionsofEurope tobeacradleofuniversalhumanrightsandvaluesandwith the human rights instruments written, signed and ratified by Europeanstates?


12

(c) How does the continued tolerance of the suffering of those condemned as

rightlessaffecttheruleoflaw?(d) Since theprotectionof fundamentalhumanrights isdesignedtoembraceboth

theexecutiveand juridical armsof state, towhat extentdoes the treatmentofmigrantsdestroythisbridgebetweenthepoliticalandthejuridical?

(e) To what extent can are migrants experimental subjects or guinea-pigs for abroaderdestructionoftherightsofpopulationsunderglobalisation?

(f) Howdogovernmentpoliciesandministerialstatementstreatingpoormigrantsandrefugeesas‘benefittourists’, ‘healthtourists’, ‘aswarm’,helptoexacerbatepopularracismandencouragehatredofmigrantsandracialviolence?

(g) HastheTribunalfoundexamplesofresistanceagainstthesemeasureswhichcanactasmodelsormarkersforfutureaction?

Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal - London Hearing November 2018 ... · The following sub-articles of...

Documents

Transcript of Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal - London Hearing November 2018 ... · The following sub-articles of...