Being fully aware of the targeted civilian killings, the extortion, the use of child soldiers, and the mass-displacement in Sri Lanka, the UK 'Foreign Office' suspended aid payments to Sri Lanka and put Sri Lanka on the 'don't go to' list of countries in its travel advice for British travellers.

While the judgement was pending in the LP Sri Lankan "country guidance" case, the Home Office were rounding up refused Sri Lankan asylum seekers and detaining them for deportation in what seemed like a cynical and blatant attempt to get rid of as many of them as possible before case-law went against them.

Not surprisingly, there have been reports that some refused Sri Lankan asylum seekers deported from the UK were re-arrested, detained and tortured again, that others have disappeared and still others have been killed.

Also not surprisingly, in the last three weeks, 70 detained Sri Lankans facing deportation went on hunger strike at detention centres across the UK.

Mr LP is a Tamil Sri Lankan refugee. The Sri Lankan authorities suffocated him with a petrol soaked polythene bag, hung him up side down and beat him with canes, sticks and plastic pipes filled with sand. The judgement in the LP Sri Lankan "country guidance" was issued on Monday 6th August 2007 - the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal allowed LP's appeal.

The Tribunal documented 12 principal risk factors -

i. Tamil ethnicity
ii. Previous record as a suspected or actual LTTE member or supporter
iii. Previous criminal record and/or outstanding arrest warrant
iv. Bail jumping and/or escaping from custody
v. Having signed a confession or similar document
vi. Having been asked by the security forces to become an informer
vii. Presence of scarring
viii. Return from London or other centre of LTTE activity or fundraising
ix. Illegal departure from Sri Lanka
x. Lack of ID card or other documentation
xi. Having made an asylum claim abroad
xii. Having relatives in the LTTE

If any refused Sri Lankan asylum seekers have one or more of these risk factors, they are urged to seek legal advice as to whether they may be able to make a fresh asylum claim.

-------------------

NCADC Background Briefing

Sri Lanka: targeted civilian killings, extortion, use of child soldiers, mass-displacement.

There have been no shortages of reports from "authoritative" sources about Sri Lanka ;

"The Sri Lankan government has apparently given its security forces a green light to use 'dirty war' tactics. ... Security forces have subjected civilians to indiscriminate attacks and impeded the delivery of humanitarian aid. Some 315,000 people have had to flee their homes due to fighting since August 2006, the vast majority Tamils and Muslims. About 100,000 were displaced in March alone. Government authorities have forced some to return to areas that remained insecure."
Human Rights Watch, 6th August 2007

"In addition to the situation of widespread insecurity and the impact of the armed conflict in the North and the East, Tamils in and from these regions are at risk of targeted violations of their human rights from all parties to the armed conflict. Harassment, intimidation, arrest, detention, torture, abduction and killing at the hands of government forces, the LTTE and paramilitary or armed groups are frequently reported to be inflicted on Tamils from the North and East. Individuals suspected of having LTTE affiliations are at risk of human rights abuses by the authorities or allegedly government sponsored paramilitary groups. In the same manner, those who refuse to support the LTTE and those who are perceived as supporters or sympathisers of the Government, risk serious violations of human rights from the LTTE."
UNHCR, December 2006

UK's Foreign Office say they are well aware of the human rights abuses in Sri Lanka

"Human rights abuses do nothing but damage Sri Lanka's image in the eyes of the world"
Foreign Secretary, Margaret Beckett MP, March 7th 2007

"Britain has suspended aid payments to Sri Lanka because of growing concerns of human rights abuses by government forces fighting Tamil rebels."
The Times, May 4th 2007

" ...repeated incidents of intimidation, disappearances, extra-judicial killings and violence by paramilitary groups in Sri Lanka are a matter of serious concern to the UK and our international partners. Tragically, it is innocent civilians who continue to bear the brunt of the deteriorating human rights situation."
Kim Howells, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office minister, 5th June 2007

"There remains a high threat from terrorism", "Attacks could be indiscriminate", "There have been detentions particularly of people of Tamil ethnicity"
Foreign and Commonwealth Office travel advice for British travellers, 8th August 2007

Meanwhile, their colleagues in the UK's Home Office seems to act counter to this view

International NGOs called on concerned governments to assist and support a United Nations mission in Sri Lanka to monitor human rights abuses. Meanwhile, our Home Office seemed to want to commit some human rights abuses of its own ; detaining and deporting some more Sri Lankan refugees back to potential detention and torture over there, no matter how the UK's "image in the eyes of the world" may be effected.

"I met a gentleman who was claiming asylum-for the second time, as he had failed the first time. He had been returned, re-arrested, detained and tortured again. I learned from talking to his lawyer that his case was not an isolated one. This country has been sending back as failed asylum seekers a number of people who went through that experience. Some managed to escape again and tried to claim asylum again; others have disappeared; still others have been killed."
Edward Davey MP, highlighting a constituent's case, 2 May 2007

One MP's simple and potentially effective strategy seems to have been ignored ;

" ..would it not be better not to return people forcibly to Sri Lanka ?"
Jeremy Corbyn MP, 2 May 2007

Home Office cynical and blatant attempt to deport Sri Lankans under the legal-radar

While the judgement was pending in the LP "country guidance" case, the Home Office were rounding up refused Sri Lankan asylum seekers and detaining them for deportation in what seemed like a cynical and blatant attempt to get rid of as many of them as possible before case-law went against them.

This follows a pattern after seemingly arbitrary targets have been set on deportations.

It seems to have started with the detention of Zimbabwean asylum asylum seekers, most of whom were later released after that "country guidance" case (AA, which has since been superseded by HS) took a legal turn.

Later it was the turn of the Congolese ; little more than one week ahead of the planned opening of the Democratic Republic of Congo "country guidance" case ("BK" - Appeal Number AA/04958/2006), the Home Office rounded up and deported 40 men, women and children on a specially chartered flight on 26th February 2007. The case, which has since been adjourned, part heard, until the 17th September 2007, will hear what many describe as "overwhelming" evidence of the possible intimidation, torture and imprisonment by DR Congo authorities of refused asylum seekers who are expelled to the DR Congo.

Then it was the turn of Sudanese ; in March 2007, just before the judgement was to be handed down in the "country guidance" case (HMGO) in relation to the removal to Khartoum of certain Sudanese nationals, the Home Office rounded up refused Sudanese asylum seekers, including Darfuris, and gave them "removal directions" on a British Airways flight to Khartoum. The Home Office lost the case.

Sri Lankans, Zimbabweans, Darfuris, Congolese ... they are the "lucky" ones, for whom a "country guidance" case may offer a flicker of hope. There is no "country guidance" case in the pipe-line for most countries - Iraqi Kurdistan, for example ; 38 refused Iraqi asylum seekers were forcibly deported to Iraq on February 12th 2007 by military plane from RAF Brize Norton.

Indeed, this year, the Home Office has unleashed it's dirtiest ever war against people seeking asylum; whilst publicly "condemning" the perpetrators of genocide and human right abuses, they are quietly deporting the Victims of War right back into the world's worst disaster zones and the hands of the world's most brutal regimes.

European Court of Human Rights and the Dutch Government suspend removals
The Dutch Government suspended removal of Sri Lankan Tamils asylum seekers in March 2007. On 25th June 2007 the European Court of Human Rights in a case of NA v the United Kingdom ordered that NA not be expelled by the UK Government to Sri Lanka until further notice.

But the UK government kept Sri Lankan asylum seekers in detention.

Sri Lankan detainees hunger strike

About 70 Sri Lankans facing deportation went on on hunger strike at detention centres across the UK, protesting against their enforced removal to Sri Lanka.

"Please do not forcibly return us to Sri Lanka until peace has returned to Sri Lanka or at least until the Country Guidance case on Sri Lanka [LP (Sri Lanka) AA/07365/2005] is promulgated by the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal because all our cases had been rejected based on the outdated Country Guidance Case on Sri Lanka namely TJ (Sri Lanka) (2002) UKIAT 01860] which was published in June 2002, 4 months after the signing of the ceasefire agreement which broke down in August 2005."
Sri Lankan Tamil detainees at Haslar Immigration Removal Centre, 24th July 2007

Home Office statements and reports seem misleading

"Voluntary returns are preferable to enforced returns but if people do not leave voluntarily, we will enforce their return. This is always done in the most sensitive way possible, treating those being removed with courtesy and dignity. Detention is an essential element in the effective enforcement of immigration control."
A Border and Immigration Agency spokesperson, in response to detainee hunger strikes

The Home Office's Country of Origin Information (COI) reports, on which Home Office decision makers and many judges continue to rely, consistently maintain that the International Organisation for Migrants (IOM), who assist asylum seekers to return voluntarily, has has stated that they are not aware of any Sri Lankan returnees being harmed on return. This was the case a number of years ago. However, IOM clarified this statement in their interview with Hotham Mission, an Australian NGO, in October 2006 during its fact finding mission to Sri Lanka in October 2006. Hotham Mission's resulting November 2006 report states :

"they [IOM] are aware of returnees not assisted by their program being arrested and harassed on or soon after arrival, particularly in cases where the returnee no longer holds a National Identity Card"

So forced returnees, as opposed to voluntary returnees who IOM assist, get arrested and harassed. Despite this clarification published by Hotham Mission in its November 2006 report, the Home Office's COI report continues to misleadingly only include IOM's outdated information and not the more recent version given in Hotham Mission's report.

LP Sri Lankan "country guidance" case won

In a judgement issued on Monday the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal allowed an appeal brought by Mr LP against the refusal to grant him status in the UK, finding that he would be at real risk of torture by the Sri Lankan authorities if returned there.

Mr. LP is a Tamil from the North of Sri Lanka who, like everyone else from his village, assisted the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) by digging bunkers and looking after injured LTTE members. In November 1999 he was arrested and detained by the Sri Lankan forces who tortured him, accusing him of being an LTTE member. The authorities suffocated Mr. LP with a petrol soaked polythene bag, hung him up side down and beat him with canes, sticks and plastic pipes filled with sand. He later agreed to demands to work as an informer for the authorities.

Fearing further torture at the hands of the Sri Lankan authorities, he left the country, arrived in the UK in January 2000 and claimed asylum the same day. His asylum claim was refused by the Home Office in 2005 and his appeal was dismissed later that year by an Immigration Judge.

The next Sri Lankan "country guidance" due to be heard in September 2007

As the hearing of the appeal by LP (Sri Lanka) took place in November 2006 and April 2007, the Tribunal could not consider any evidence relating to the expulsion of Tamils from Colombo in June 2007, as documented by Human Rights Watch in its report "Return to War: Human Rights Under Siege", published on Monday. The expulsion of Tamils from Colombo, where the UK government removes all Sri Lankan "failed" asylum seekers to, will be considered in the next "country guidance" case called AN/SS (Sri Lanka), due to be heard in September 2007.

What "refused" Sri Lankan asylum seekers could do now

You may be able to make a fresh asylum claim if you have one or more of the principal risk factors which the Tribunal identified, listed above. We suggest you download the attached judgement of the LP case and take it or send it, together with a copy of your asylum appeal refusal and documents relating to any subsequent legal challenge, to an immigration legal advisor and ask if it is viable for you to make a fresh asylum claim.

What everyone can do

There are still Sri Lankan asylum seekers being held in UK detention centres today. We urge you to write to your MP today and demand that ;

1. In light of the LP "country guidance" case appeal being allowed on Monday, all Sri Lankan detainees should be released immediately.

2. Their cases should be reviewed in line with the UNHCR Position, December 2006 ; "For those asylum-seekers from Sri Lanka whose claims were previously examined and were found not to be in need of international protection, UNHCR recommends a review of their claims in light of the new circumstances as described in this position"

3. Competent immigration legal advisors be made available, together with legal aid funding, for appropriate fresh asylum claims to made.

Source for this Message:

The case of Mr LP;
Appeal number : AA/07356/2005
Heard : 27/28th November 2006 and 12th April 2007
Counsel instructed by Birnberg Peirce & Partners : Mr A MacKenzie, Doughty Street Chambers
 http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIAT/2007/00076.html

Hotham Mission November 2006 report
 http://203.56.94.10/asp/Sri_Lanka_Report.pdf

UNHCR POSITION ON THE INTERNATIONAL PROTECTION
NEEDS OF ASYLUM-SEEKERS FROM SRI LANKA - December 2006
 http://www.unhcr.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/refworld/rwmain/opendocpdf.pdf?docid=459a1fcb2

"Foreign Secretary meets Sri Lankan Foreign Minister"
FCO press release March 07, 2007
 http://www.wired-gov.net/WGLaunch.aspx?ARTCL=44523

Dutch Government suspends enforced removals to Sri Lanka
Immigration and Nationalisation Service, Ministry of Justice, Netherlands, March 2007.

"Britain rushes to send back Darfur asylum families before court ruling"
The Times, 2nd April 2007
 http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/africa/article1599808.ece

House of Commons, 2 May 2007
 http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmhansrd/cm070502/debtext/70502-0009.htm#07050240000003

"Britain blocks £1.5m aid to Sri Lanka over human rights abuses"
Richard Beeston, The Times Friday 4th May 2007
 http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article1744361.ece

House of Commons, 5 Jun 2007
 http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmhansrd/cm070605/text/70605w0035.htm#0706068000174

FCO Travel Advice, Sri Lanka, Still Current at: 8 August 2007
 http://www.fco.gov.uk/servlet/Front?pagename=OpenMarket/Xcelerate/ShowPage&c=Page&cid=1007029390590&a=KCountryAdvice&aid=1013618386451

Detainees' hunger strike protest
Last Updated: Tuesday, 24 July 2007, 15:23 GMT 16:23 UK
 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cambridgeshire/6913572.stm

"Hunger strike continues"
Hillingdon Times, 2nd August 2007
 http://www.hillingdontimes.co.uk/mostpopular.var.1590366.mostcommented.hunger_strike_continues.php

Human Rights Watch (New York, August 6, 2007)
"Government Abuses Intensify -Killings, Abductions and Displacement Soar as Impunity Reigns"
 http://hrw.org/english/docs/2007/08/03/slanka16573.htm