Section 55 suspended

     NASS have informed all agencies that they have suspended issuing negative Section 55 decisions with effect from 20th February 2003 and that all those who have received a negative decision can ask for it to be reconsidered. NASS have decided to do this on advice from legal council but the decision could be overturned by Parliament.

  Justice Collins, in his judgement yesterday on Section 55, said there were quite clearly breaches of Articles 3, 6 and 8 of the Human Rights Act and this has quite clearly influenced NASS to take the action to suspend issuing negative decisions.

     NCADC estimates that there are up to *7,000 asylum seekers who have received negative decisions since 8th January 2003. On average **60% of all applicants have been refused support.

      How are those asylum seekers who have already been made destitute going to find out about this change as they are probably wandering the streets of the UK?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Notes
       * Figure extrapolated from Home Office statistics for January and February 2002.
       ** Last para at 4 of the judgement: The adjudicator is thus able to reconsider the facts and to reach his own decision on the application. I was informed that statistics showed that some 40% of appeals have been allowed, a figure relied on by Mr. Starmer QC in submitting that there must be real concern at the standard of decision-making by NASS. Safeguards to ensure fairness are therefore needed.

===========

News from Lynne Jones MP

Government must restore food and shelter for destitute refugees

When Parliament returns from recess, Lynne Jones will table the following Commons Motion:

High court ruling on restoring food and shelter for destitute asylum seekers

That this House welcomes the High Court ruling on 19 February 2003 restoring food and shelter for destitute asylum seekers; is deeply concerned that the organisations working with refugees have reported people turning up freezing cold, hungry, exhausted and confused; notes the finding of the Joint Committee on Human Rights that it is difficult to envisage a case where a person could be destitute without there being a threat of a violation of Articles 3 and or 8 of the ECHR and the Committee's comment that "We reiterate that the Secretary of State has a duty under section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 to avoid that risk."; fur