Instead of welcoming or offering compassion, this new bill risks criminalising and intensifying the vulnerability of those who are forced to rely on smugglers because there are no accessible safe routes for them to use, writes Sonya Sceats. [GETTY]
The government’s new Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill, which promises a slew of new criminal offences and counter-terror style powers, is the fourth piece of immigration legislation to go through Parliament in as many years. This bill, which is just entering Committee Stage in the House of Commons, enacts the government’s plans to ‘smash the gangs’ by targeting people smugglers.
It’s with relief and no small amount of joy that we welcome the repeal of some of the most harmful aspects of the previous government’s anti-refugee laws. Like the immoral ‘cash for humans’ Safety of Rwanda Act which, for survivors of torture, represented an ever-present threat that they could be sped onto planes to face an uncertain future in an unsafe country.
The scheme was eventually abandoned, partly due to mass public outrage channeled through Freedom from Torture and other members of the 650+ strong #TogetherWithRefugees coalition, making it impossible for a plane to ever get off the ground.
In another victory for caring people up and down the country, the new bill will also repeal sections of the Illegal Migration Act that effectively extinguish access to asylum in the UK.
These important reforms affirm this government’s commitment to the rule of law and will reverse a shameful trajectory that left thousands of people, including survivors of torture, stuck in legal limbo and unable to move on with their lives. But the bill leaves too much of the anti-refugee legislative scaffolding in place with key sections of the Illegal Migration Act and the Nationality and Borders Act left untouched.
If the government is ever to achieve its ambition to modernise the asylum system, then it must take this opportunity to remove from the statue books laws that inhibit access to justice, deny refugees a fair hearing and create a risk of return to torture.
While this bill doesn’t go far enough in some areas, it risks very serious over-reach in others. The counter-terror-style powers and the criminal offences introduced risk casting all those forced to move across borders seeking protection as being a threat to our national security.
This bill risks treating the people who’ve fled from some of the worst crimes imaginable, as though they themselves are the criminals.
I know from years of working with survivors of torture how damaging it is for states to shift the stigma onto them, instead of those who commit human rights abuses. The dangerous journeys they take are all too often the only ways they can reach safety. And instead of punishing them, we should be protecting them.
Many of those we see at Freedom from Torture have told us that they would likely be dead if they hadn’t fled their home countries. The people trying to reach the UK in small boats are looking to the UK for protection. They’re fleeing places like Afghanistan and Iran precisely because they value their human rights and believe that we’re a country that does so as well.
In our direct experience, so many are themselves democracy fighters, human rights defenders, and women’s rights activists escaping authoritarian and repressive regimes.
Instead of welcoming or offering compassion, this new bill risks criminalising and intensifying the vulnerability of those who are forced to rely on smugglers because there are no accessible safe routes for them to use. Further criminalisation, surveillance and state interference in the rights of vulnerable migrants will do nothing to address the root causes of why people flee their homes in the first place.
The government’s efforts to try and disrupt the smuggling gangs – delivered through the prism of criminality and national security – are deeply flawed. Smugglers will simply adapt to these new measures, as they have always done, and continue to provide their services to desperate people who have no other choice.
But officials will now have the power to seize mobile phones, divert money transfers, shut down bank accounts, and even cut off internet access. These new powers are targeted at smugglers, but they will no doubt catch people who are just trying to stay in contact with loved ones who are taking dangerous journeys across borders towards the UK.
Although the government seeks to reassure us that these powers will not be used on a blanket basis, in practice every person crossing the Channel with a phone will likely be targeted.
Another concerning aspect is the inclusion of the “endangering another during sea crossing” provision. And this is clearly aimed at the desperate people inside the boats, many of whom will be acting out of sheer terror or under the coercive power of smugglers.
The government has acknowledged that this will likely target parents who bring their children on these dangerous journeys because there is no other route to safety. These powers are so broad they’ll catch everyone in the same drag net. They will not discriminate between the smugglers and the refugees forced to use their services to reach safety.
We’ve already seen how the use of legislation to curtail the rights of migrants and set higher criminal penalties for immigration offences results in the wrongful prosecution of refugees, including unaccompanied children and people acting under duress.
We need to ask ourselves: in a democratic and compassionate society, do we really want to systematically violate the rights of people who are coming to this country to seek safety after torture and persecution?
We should all be very alarmed by the introduction of yet further criminal offences and the proposal to use counter-terror style powers that will likely be applied to almost everyone who arrives by small boat.
More than 80% of the British public want an asylum system that is fair, efficient and treats refugees with compassion. But the government’s borders bill risks making criminals out of the men, women, and children who are coming to the UK to find safety, to recover and rebuild their lives.
It is estimated that one in three asylum-seekers and refugees living in countries like the UK are survivors of torture. And we know from the survivors we support, that more enforcement doesn’t stop people moving to find sanctuary. All it does is push them into more dangerous routes, putting them at greater risk of harm and exploitation.
Once and for all, the government must face up to the ugly truth that in the absence of safe routes, refugees will continue to risk their lives to cross borders in search of safety. The bill wrongly casts refugees fleeing war and torture as a national security threat, and this is barely believable from a government that proposes to champion the rule of law.
Sonya Sceats is Chief Executive of Freedom from Torture which is dedicated to healing and protecting people who have survived torture.
You can follow her on X: @SonyaSceats
Have questions or comments? Email us at: editorial-english@newarab.com
Opinions expressed in this article remain those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The New Arab, its editorial board or staff, or the author’s employer.
