§ Mr. BurnettTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many prosecutions have been launched under section 25 of the Immigration Act 1971 and sections 4 and 5 of the Asylum and Immigration Act 1996, in respect of the offences of(a) facilitating the entry to the United Kingdom of an illegal entrant, (b) obtaining leave to enter the United Kingdom by deception and (c) assisting or facilitating a person in obtaining leave to enter the United Kingdom by deception since (i) the 1996 Act came into force and (ii) 1 May 1997. [49170]
§ Mr. MichaelInformation taken from the Home Office Court Proceedings database is given in the table.
§ Mr. Mike O'BrienThe available information for the financial years 1993–94 to 1997–98 is given in the table. These figures reflect cases in which the Immigration Advisory Service and the Refugee Legal Centre acted as representative in appeals heard by the Immigration Appellate Authority. They exclude other activities, such as giving advice that did not lead to an appeal hearing and bail applications etc.
555W
Immigration appeals in which the Immigration Advisory Service and the Refugee Legal Centre acted as representative, financial years 1993–94 to 1997–98 Immigration Advisory Service1 Refugee Legal Centre2 Financial Year Asylum appeals Other immigration appeals Total Asylum appeals 1993–94 3— 3— 3— 1,100 1994–95 3— 3— 3— 2,204 1995–96 4— 4— 5,066 2,159 1996–97 667 2,613 3,280 2,534 1997–98 1,538 3,919 5,457 3,429 1Source: Immigration Advisory Service 2Source: Refugee Legal Centre 3Not applicable 4Not available
§ Mr. BurnettTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, pursuant to his answer to the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Sir N. Fowler) of 8 June 1998,Official Report, column 438, what was the average time taken to reach a decision on an asylum application (a) immediately prior to the enactment of the Asylum and Immigration Appeals Act 1993 and (b), in the case of applications submitted post-July 1993, immediately prior to the enactment of the Asylum and Immigration Act 1996. [49198]
§ Mr. Mike O'BrienIn my reply to the right hon. Member for Sutton Coldfield (Sir N. Fowler), the estimated average time to initial decision in applications for asylum lodged in the United Kingdom was given as 58 months in applications lodged prior to the Asylum and Immigration Appeals Act 1993 and 14 months for those lodged after this Act.
In comparison, applications were estimated to be taking, on average, 20 months to reach an initial decision immediately prior to the enactment of the Asylum and Immigration Act 1993 on 26 July 1993. Applications lodged after the 1993 Act were estimated to be taking just under 11 months immediately prior to the enactment of the Asylum and Immigration Act 1996 on 24 July 1996.
The increases of 38 months in pre-1993 Act applications and four months in those lodged after this Act reflect the impact on the average figures of the resolution of old cases within the system as backlogs are cleared.
§ Mr. BurnettTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many rejected asylum seekers, having exhausted all appeal rights, are currently awaiting removal from the United Kingdom. [49166]
§ Mr. Mike O'BrienThe backlog of failed asylum seekers liable for removal, at May 1998, was approximately 19,500 persons. That figure represents a snapshot, taken from Immigration and Nationality Directorate (IND) port and enforcement databases, of those failed asylum seekers (excluding dependants) who have exhausted their rights of appeal (including any who did not submit an appeal against the refusal of asylum) and who are liable for removal.
556WThe above figure needs to be qualified. Firstly, it does not cover failed after-entry asylum seekers whose appeal rights have been exhausted, who have no right to remain, but against whom enforcement action has not yet been initiated.
Secondly, the figure of 19,500 includes a large proportion of cases (estimated at around 90 per cent.) where there are one or more barriers to immediate removal—such as absconding, judicial review, representations by hon. Members and difficulties with removal documentation. Typically, absconding represents a barrier to removal in half of asylum removals backlog cases.
Furthermore, the figure may include some persons who have actually left the United Kingdom voluntarily but whose departure is unknown to IND.
§ Mr. ClappisonTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment he has made of the six asylum seekers acquitted on 17 June of violent disorder at the Campsfield Detention Centre being placed at additional risk of persecution if returned to their own countries as a result of their trial. [49177]
§ Mr. Mike O'BrienWhen the court directed that they be found not guilty, those who continued to be subject to detention under the Immigration Act 1971, were found places in our detention estate and were held pending consideration of arrangements for removal. However, I can confirm that the United Nations High Commission for Refugees have been afforded until 13 July to look further at the cases involved, and that we will consider any new information that may come to light in individual cases, together with any other issues, in the normal way, including any information on relevant risks of any kind.