This old chestnut runs and runs.
Whilst I fully support allowing genuine LGBT asylum seekers whose well-being and possibly even lives may be at risk from some countries where they are illegal, there are two important factors that need to be determined in each and every case:
1. Are these people actually LGBT?
2. Are they genuinely at risk, and do people in their own countries know who they are and have they been threatened, or is there a likelihood they could be at risk?
The first question has to be asked simply to ascertain if the applicant is who they say they are, and not just somebody riding on the back of the situation. The second question is a) even if they are LGBT, are they also exploiting the situation, and b) even if they are not, how serious is the threat?
If there is a clear-cut case that demonstrates all these factors, then thy should be allowed in; however, as we all know, it is difficult to prove all, if any, of those criteria. I am really not sure how to proceed.
This article mentions “Malawian lesbian refugee, Esther C.”
With regard to your point #2, she is not at the slightest risk of harm if she returns to Malawi, even though homosexual acts are illegal here. Our new President at the state opening of the National Assembly in May said (1):
“Some laws … will be repealed as a matter of urgency… these include the provisions regarding indecent practices and unnatural acts.”
Within a few days, the Attorney General stated that there will be “no arrests or prosecutions based on the law under review.” (2)
Now, it is true that in a muddled AP article published recently the President APPEARED to have made a U-turn, but careful reading of the article shows that repeal of the laws has NOT been taken off her agenda for change.
I believe that Esther C is at no risk of harm if she is returned to Malawi. She is part of a group of LGBT asylum seekers at Yarls Wood which has issued this statement (3):
“Stop Deporting Lesbians & Gay Men to Fa
(OOPS: first post continued)
“Stop Deporting Lesbians & Gay Men to Face Torture and Death.”
“We are particularly at danger of being killed by members of the society as we will not be able to get protection from the governments of our individual country who already criminalise Homosexuality – our sexual orientation.”
As far as Malawi is concerned, nothing in that statement is true. I am fed up reading rubbish like this about my country!
It is certainly difficult. We can’t just let any immigrant into the country, even if they do claim to be LGBT. It is necessary to judge each case individually and sadly, we will often be wrong as a result.
Yes indeed… But as Peter said, listing them for deportation even before their cases are heard must surely be wrong?
Well, what if the waiting list is so large that people would have to take years to get a case? Are people allowed to wait in the country for a decade or two while things get processed? I understand that this is quite the exaggeration, but I find it hard to believe that we’d turn people away for absolutely no plausible reason.
It will be a cold day in Hell when we do end up with a government that keeps it’s election promises. Ironically while this government continues to deport LGBT asylum seekers back to their homophobic home countries, they still do not seem to be able to get a grip on mass immigration.
Agreed. The UK is awash with immigrants, both from inside and outside the EU, and it is slowly but surely destroying the countries infrastructure. Health, education and above all social services and DWP cannot cope. What is a teacher supposed to do when their class speaks 30 different languages, and most speak little or no English?
What on earth are people supposed to prove that they are LGBT short of taking part in a full on orgy in the court room?
It beggars belief that, in some case such as the one indicated for Ola, because he is masculine, that the judge does not believe that he is gay. Does the judge expect all gay men to be effeminate, limp wristed mincers? For proof that gay men can also be masculine, there are plenty of examples, Gareth Thomas for one.
The onus is not on the courts to disprove the person is heterosexual. If somebody wants to come into this country on the basis that he or she is gay, and that they are being persecuted because of their sexuality, it is entirely up to them to prove it. If they cannot, then sorry, why should we be expected to believe them simply upon their word?
I would rather see the facts than a selective person as forfront of an ongoing issue which other highlight than PT, I refer http://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/briefings/migration-uk-asylum or http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/asylum/
How can LGBT asylum seekers be fairly treated when the whole country is going through one of its worse xenophobic crisis? Many people are irrationally afraid and fearful of immigrants and foreigners, but if you ask them how they’d like to be treated abroad, they’ll tell you they expect a 5 star treatment, when they themselves won’t return the favour.
What utter sh|te! The point is, we have let immigrants pour into this country unabated for years until it has reached breaking point. Now when people actually raise concerns, wishy-washy liberals like you come up with bollocks like “xenophobic crisis”. If successive governments had been more judicious about who they let in over the previous 20 years instead of letting all and sundry wander in unheeded, the indigenous population might be a little more open minded about allowing the genuinely needy and deserving without having to ask such personal and intimate questions.
Without immigrants there would be no indigenous population. Xenophobic crisis is a reasonable definition of the present situation. Why do you think the UKIP and BNP parties are growing in popularity?
Personally I’d rather let a thousand fraudsters into the country if it meant that one genuine person was saved a forced return to sometimes gruesome consequences of not only being gay but also fleeing to what they thought was safety.
Then you are a moron.
Immigration policies are there for a reason. If no caution is shown then everybody will jump on the bandwagon and the floodgates will open. Stop being so fcking naive.
If these people have a genuine reason for coming here, then they need to provide sufficient evidence to back it up. That is the message we need to get across instead of just showing up at our front door with nothing.