Seeking asylum in the UK should be a right, not a privilege

‘Stop the boats’ has been a slogan of the UK Conservative government since March 2023 when it introduced new legislation aimed at preventing people from claiming asylum if they arrived in the UK illegally.  On 7 March 2023, the UK Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, gave a press conference, opening with the statement that it is the country, and not criminal gangs, that should decide who comes to the UK. He claimed that the number of people arriving on small boats had quadrupled in the previous two years.

There was no mention of the fact that there are no legal ways to come to the UK if you want to claim asylum or why most people who come illegally are using boats rather than any other, possibly safer ways.

Very few foreign nationals can come to or even transit the UK without a visa. There is no such thing as a refugee or asylum visa. On 19 July 2023, the Home Secretary, Suella Braverman, announced a new visa restriction for Honduras and Namibia on the grounds that “there has been a sustained and significant increase in the number of UK asylum applications being made by these nationals, who have abused the provision to visit the UK for a limited period as non-visa nationals in order to claim asylum.”

''It certainly cannot be assumed that people who arrived legally will receive a more positive reception or a better outcome than those who arrive on small boats.''

It followed a similar pattern that was adopted under previous governments. Visas were imposed on Sri Lankan citizens in June 1985 at the start of a brutal conflict in the country.

There was also no mention in the Prime Minister’s speech of the reason that small boats from France have become the chosen means of travel to the UK for those who have to use irregular methods. The preferred method of clandestine entry had been in the back of a lorry. But, due to previous UK government deals with France, that route was eliminated.

In September 2016, for example, the UK agreed to pay £2 million to the French government to build a wall in Calais and £80 million to private security firms operating at French ports. People smugglers changed their business model and small boats replaced lorries. Journeys to the UK therefore became more dangerous.

The Illegal Migration Act, not yet implemented, prevents people who arrive illegally from claiming asylum. It has been strongly criticised by the UN for breaching international law, including by the UN Refugee Agency itself. It also prevents people claiming to be victims of human trafficking receiving the support that they need, a move criticised by the Council of Europe’s group of experts on trafficking in human beings. The intention is to detain and remove those who arrive on or after 7 March 2023, either returning them to their own country or, for example, to transfer them to Rwanda with which the UK reached a deal in April 2022 at a cost of £169,000 per person.

Not content with the passing of the Act, the government followed it with a week-long focus under the same slogan of ‘Stop the boats’, finishing on 11 August. A significant amount of time and energy was devoted to the housing of asylum seekers on a barge, the Bibby Stockholm, off the coast of Dorset. It ended with all 37 men transferred that week (of whom just two had arrived on a boat) being transferred to hotels on health grounds after it became known that legionella bacteria had been detected in the water supply on the barge.

This was followed by the death of six Afghan men when a boat, carrying more than 50 people, capsized off the coast of France.

The outcome may show that the government is at best ill-informed, at worst treating people seeking asylum as political pawns in a wider political game that, in reality, has little to do with asylum.

Efforts to counter the rhetoric of the Conservative government have led to Labour politicians talking about fast-tracking cases depending on nationality and pro-asylum and refugee advocates using phrases such as “safe and legal routes” despite the difficulties of creating and sustaining them in a way which can lead to positive outcomes for people seeking asylum.

Whether or not the government’s focus on asylum is genuine, it nevertheless leads to the danger of setting the agenda and pro-migrant and refugee advocates at risk of falling into the same false distinctions. It certainly cannot be assumed that people who arrived legally will receive a more positive reception or a better outcome than those who arrive on small boats.

The perception created by the media over a period of time is that “refugees” are people fleeing war or at least that there is a fairly immediate risk to their lives, forcing them to leave their family and homes to reach a safe place. However, people can fear persecution or serious harm when nothing yet has happened to them. For all people claiming asylum, it is the fear of what may happen if they return that is the issue. And, in terms of Home Office policy, that can depend on which country they are from. “Illegal entry” is not the only precursor for a refusal to grant asylum.

“Safe and legal routes”, “clearing the backlog” or “speeding up decisions” will not automatically lead to a better outcome unless and until there is a commitment to see asylum as a right and not, as one minister has recently said, a privilege.

Dr. Sue Conlan is a UK immigration lawyer and Director of TACTIC Immigration and Asylum CIC.

Follow her on Twitter: @sueconlan

Have questions or comments? Email us at: editorial-english@newarab.com

Opinions expressed here are the author's own, and do not necessarily reflect those of their employer, or of The New Arab and its editorial board or staff.