| 1657 | Almamy Taal | "...It is ridiculous that this country is deporting the type of people we need..." Kirrily Pells's statement shows how much the HO’s plans to tackle immigration are controversial and unfair. Guy Njike’s case is not an isolate case, neither is a one off. I have seen many genuine asylum seekers with well founded fear for their lives handed over (deported) to their executioners. As I am writing nobody knows about their whereabouts. The justice system appears to be a mockery or parody of justice some times. At time the HO introduces the so called "Legacy Cases" to clear their bag log (to remind people that the "bag log" is a result of incompetency, mismanagement , lack of transparency and total lack of communication between HO and its different departments), why drawing media attention and wasting taxpayers’' monies to delay and deny justice? Instead, Guy should have been granted Refugee Status under the 1951 Geneva Convention. Sometimes, HO plays "dumb" and turns a blind eye on genuine claims whilst they unwind the red carpet to welcome and nurture genuine offenders. It is really nice talking about "integration", “community cohesion", "tougher policies toward offenders" and all the “bla bla” that politicians adore, but it doesn't and would not make sense if theory and practice are separated by a huge gap called honesty, courage, transparency and competency. I wonder when the HO will stop this "ping pong" game with the media and the public. I wonder when the HO will stop shaming itself with cases like this. I wonder when the HO will tell the truth about immigration to British people. I wonder when British people will be aware of all the HO’s ridiculous, inhuman and unjust legislations and policies they have introduced to thwart asylum applicants or to force them into destitution?
People who read these comments may ask who the author is.
Whilst it may not be necessary, but because I have nothing to hide, i would introduce myself as that a “failed” asylum seeker, but an exiled investigative journalist. I have submitted a Fresh Claim and further Representations since October 2006 and I am still awaiting a decision. What happens to Guy may happen to me as well. What is certain is I would not be deported alive. I have been arrested and tortured twice and I would not bear a third one. In addition, people have entrusted me by passing secret damaging information on to me and, if I were to be arrested alive it would seriously endanger their lives. For me, life is simple and as Winson Churchill said: “when in hell keep going” because with or without Refugee Status, there is no way back and my only chance to survive is to “keep going.” I do not fear the HO’s decision because I am a “dead man walking”, but nothing will stop me to fight against injustice anywhere because, as Saint Thomas De Aquinas said: “when a law is unjust, one has the moral obligation to fight against it” I work voluntarily six days per week with several charitable organisations, I have received many certificates and awards, I meet HO’s Representatives in conferences and meetings, I have direct contacts with MPs and Peers, I am co-founder and vice chair of a migrant and refugee community organisation, I am a member of EJN (Exiled Journalist Network) and co-founder of E-JAG (Exiled Journalists Action Group) but all these would not make any sense if I had forgotten who I am why I fled to UK. The 1951 Geneva Convention relating to the Status of Refugees is very explicit. The Convention defines a Refugee as someone who has a well-founded fear of persecution for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion; is outside the country they belong to or normally reside in, and is unable or unwilling to return home for fear of persecution. As you may know, the Convention was drafted by the United Nations in direct response to the large-scale refugee movements as a result of the Holocaust and the Second World War. In the light of the atrocities committed during that period, governments were determined to ensure that people would never again find themselves unable to escape persecution.
The Convention was the first international agreement to guarantee protection to refugees and its principles are applied worldwide. The Convention re-enforces the fundamental human right to seek and enjoy asylum from persecution by defining who can enjoy such a right and by guaranteeing certain equal rights to those recognized as refugees.
Asylum seekers and refugees have become a constant issue in the political debate, yet the subject is very rarely debated in a balanced or truthful way. If some sections of the British press are to be believed, UK shores are being ‘swamped’ by ‘bogus’ refugees, intent on exploiting the social welfare system. Unfortunately, politicians are creating policies that pander to this image of refugees - policies that make it difficult for people seeking protection to make effective use of the asylum system. Guy Njike has been in this country since 1999. He does not depend on benefits and did not try to exploit the system. Instead, He is graduated in this country; has been working and paying taxes, has integrated the community and has not committed any criminal offence. Guy is a perfect role model that this country could be proud of offering sanctuary.
What would you do, if you had been...?
• Imprisoned and repeatedly raped and tortured for supporting the wrong political party.
• Harassed, threatened, beaten and driven out of your home for being from the wrong ethnic group.
• Stripped of your home, job and rights to education for believing in the wrong God.
• Sent home to find your house burnt down, your family dead and a price on your own head for being born in the wrong village.
Asylum is not about terrorism, NHS waiting lists, rising crime or falling education standards. Asylum is about the protection of people, the rebuilding of lives, and a second chance for those from whom life was first taken. Asylum is a human right and should remain so.
Justice delayed is justice denied.
Almamy Taal
T1107488
Exiled (Investigative) Journalist
28/02/08 |
| 1682 | Maurice Frank | Under the court change, created by European Court of Human Rights case 41597/98 in 1999 and applying now to 157 countries, courts + other legal authrotities no longer have final decisisons. All decisions are open-endedly daultable on their logic. Thanks to the court change, the rejection of Mr Nijke's appeal has no legal existence + the deportation is illegal.
I have made the same response to many opther similar cases, but apart from 1 acknowledgement by IAS's Keith Best in 2002, every big organisation to help asylum seekers has corruptly + illegally ignored the court change + avoided making any comment on it. It's like all they care about is their own leaders' careers suffering embarrassment if the political class continue not to recognise the court change, as it is under a media silence + being covered up. Mr Nijke's support campaign has an automatic + will have traceable liable illegal blood on their hands if they conceive that a choice not to do this exists even in theory. |