{"id":2707,"date":"2019-07-30T14:32:02","date_gmt":"2019-07-30T14:32:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/?p=2707"},"modified":"2019-07-30T15:10:32","modified_gmt":"2019-07-30T15:10:32","slug":"heightened-immigration-rules-pave-the-way-for-another-windrush-style-scandal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/?p=2707","title":{"rendered":"Heightened Immigration Rules Pave the Way for Another Windrush-style Scandal"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Since 2010, Theresa May\u2019s \u2018hostile environment\u2019 for immigrants has\nbrought a catalogue of human rights violations and inequalities in Britain. Immigration\nrules have doubled in length<\/a> in just a handful of years, while the margin\nfor error allowed in applications is ever-shrinking. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The government\u2019s tepid efforts to taper the hostility has done little\nto ameliorate the situation, while Brexit is\ntransforming the immigration landscape as we know it. Just beyond the horizon\nlies the skills-based immigration vision for all EU entrants past 2021,\nincluding a series of clampdowns on visa criteria.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In anticipation of the changes, the\nHome Office intends on tightening visa requirements such as the controversial\n\u2018good character\u2019 requirement that all applicants over the age of 10 must\nsatisfy in order to settle, register or naturalise\nas a British citizen<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What does \u2018good character\u2019 even mean?<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

Despite there being no definition of \u2018good character\u2019 in the\nBritish\nNationality Act 1981<\/a> (BNA), the requirement has been enforced since 2006 (though\nthe Home Office only published official guidance<\/a>\nnotes this January). <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The non-exhaustive list of desirable conduct includes the\nobvious (war criminals, repeat offenders and terrorists have no chance at\npassing the test). Other factors to assess include financial soundness (debt,\nnon-payment, liquidation and bankruptcy) as well as notoriety and deception\nand\/or dishonesty. Bizarrely, applicants could be refused for obtaining a\ntraffic violation fine in the last three years prior to applying, especially if\nthey fail to disclose the fine or have racked up multiple which demonstrate a\n\u2018pattern of offending\u2019.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

If British citizens by birth were liable to having their\ncitizenship revoked for tripping over a council bill or for being caught\nspeeding or for even obtaining a police caution in their youth, how many would\nbe left in this country?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The new guidance also impinges some of the harshest redlines\nfor those found overstaying a visa. Up until 2016, overstayers were granted a\n28-day period during which they could make an application without being\npenalised. Now, however, overstayers are stripped of any grace period and must\nendure a decade long wait before attempting again \u2013 unless they can complete\nthe arduous task of proving that overstaying was beyond their control. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Misuse of the \u2018good character\u2019 criteria<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

While obviously necessary to impose restrictions on migrants\nseeking citizenship rights in the UK, it\u2019s evident that the Home Office\u2019s decision\nmakers overzealously look for reasons to refuse applications.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although overstaying will not be taken into account if it is\n\u201cthe sole adverse factor\u201d affecting an individual\u2019s character, Home Office\nofficials can \u2013 and do \u2013 convincingly build a portfolio that deprives the\napplicant of innocence. In 2014, over 1,000 students were deported in what is\ndescribed as Britain\u2019s forgotten and largest immigration scandal to date. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The \u2018good character\u2019 criteria was also used against near-2,000\nhighly-skilled working migrants<\/a>, who were depicted as terrorists and\nthreatened with deportation for submitting applications for Indefinite Leave\nto Remain<\/a> with minor tax errors last year. Fortunately, the Court<\/a> of Appeal recently ruled that the liberal use of the\n322(5)-terrorism paragraph was \u201clegally flawed\u201d, with \u201cserious procedural\nunfairness\u201d and a \u201cdistinct unlawfulness\u201d across the four cases that were\nbrought to trial. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

UK-born children denied their rights<\/strong><\/h4>\n\n\n\n

One\nchild a week on average had their British citizenship application refused\nbetween 2013-18<\/a>. A high majority were denied for committing trivial and\npetty crimes. Following from a forewarning by the Independent\nChief Inspector\u2019s 2017 report<\/a>, the Joint\nCommittee on Human Rights (JCHR) released a damning indictment this July<\/a>,\nechoing their \u201cdeep concern\u201d for children being refused because of caseworkers\u2019\n\u201cunduly heavy-handed approach\u201d. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although being born in Britain doesn\u2019t automatically grant\ncitizenship and children of migrants must register, the Committee find it \u201cinappropriate\u201d\nto apply the \u2018good character\u2019 test to young children who are, in every other\nsense, British. Something as minor as a police caution should not be enough to\nwarrant an actual refusal, and doing so goes against the British Nationality\nAct.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Struggling to cough up the \u00a31,012 base-fee, thousands of\ndisadvantaged and vulnerable families are plunged into destitution. 120,000\nchildren are affected just by the costs<\/a> alone, which is applicable per\nchild with no discounts, waivers or refunds, even in the event of a refusal. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Caseworkers even have the power to deny an application for\nfeeling \u201cdoubts about their character\u201d which dubiously opens the door to\ndiscriminatory biases held by the often anonymous, subjective decision-maker.\nMigrants face severe repercussions which are often life-changing for making the\ntiniest and most tedious of mistakes, which isn\u2019t reciprocated onto Home Office\nofficials who can catastrophically rip genuine people\u2019s lives apart without\nbeing held personally accountable. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

David\nBolt,<\/a> Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration, blames\nParliament\u2019s blinkered focus on Brexit and the Windrush fiasco for snatching\nthe government\u2019s time away from other areas, which is partly true. But the\nentangled and overly convoluted web the Home Office has spun in its endeavour\nto reach an impossible net migration target does not bode well for the future\neither. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Without reform and \u201cadequate support, guidance and training\u201d\ngiven to Home Office staff, claim the Committee, the UK\u2019s exit from the EU could pave the way for\nanother scandal in the same vein as Windrush, in which EU nationals will be\ndeprived of their rights when they are subjected to the immigration rules post-2021.\nThis possibility, combined with the continued inappropriate use of \u2018good\ncharacter\u2019 tests for British-born children, is a grim prospect indeed. <\/p>\n<\/span>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Since 2010, Theresa May\u2019s \u2018hostile environment\u2019 for immigrants has brought a catalogue of human rights violations and inequalities in Britain. Immigration rules have doubled in length in just a handful of years, while the margin for error allowed in applications is ever-shrinking. The government\u2019s tepid efforts to taper the hostility has done little to ameliorate […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":152,"featured_media":2709,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_links_to":"","_links_to_target":""},"categories":[1404,1394,1396],"tags":[],"coauthors":[1629],"class_list":["post-2707","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-law-and-justice","category-long-reads","category-uk"],"amp_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/07\/cropped-annie-spratt-kMuaT5cXggc-unsplash.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2707","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/152"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2707"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2707\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/2709"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2707"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2707"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2707"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/politicalquarterlyblog.preliveweb.site\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcoauthors&post=2707"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}