§ Mr. Tony LloydTo ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the speed at which entry clearance cases are now being dealt with when referred to his Department.
§ Mr. EggarCases referred by entry clearance officers in Commonwealth countries, the Philippines, Thailand and Indonesia are sent by posts direct to the immigration and nationality department of the Home Office. All other referrals are channelled via the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. The time taken to deal with referred applications varies from case to case and average times cannot be given.
§ Mr. MaddenTo ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs when he is going to take decisions on the applications made at the post in728W Islamabad, by Abdul Sattar, date of birth 30 June 1978, Abdul Ghaffar, 11 January 1972, Safeena Kausar, 7 March 1982, and Fareeda Kausar, 28 August 1980, to enter the United Kingdom; when their applications were made; what inquiries have been made into their applications; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. EggarAll four applications were lodged on 2 July 1987 and are still under consideration. In view of the compassionate circumstances the applicants were given a priority interview on 28 August 1988.
Following that interview the entry clearance officer at Islamabad was not satisfied as to the claimed family relationship of the applicants and deferred a decision for local inquiries to be made. These inquiries have however proved inconclusive and on 22 March 1989 the entry clearance officer referred the applications to the Home Office for further consideration.
§ Mr. MaddenTo ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs why Mr. Nadeem Mumtaz, date of birth 9 December 1965, was refused a visa to visit the United Kingdom by the post in Karachi; and if he will reconsider this case in the light of Mr. Mumtaz's four previous visits.
§ Mr. EggarMr. Nadeem Mumtaz was refused entry clearance on 16 February 1989 as the entry clearance officer at Karachi was not satisfied, as he is required to be under paragraph 17 of HC 169, that Mr. Mumtaz was a genuine visitor who would leave the United Kingdom at the end of his permitted stay. Mr. Mumtaz sought a two months stay to visit a relative in this country. The entry clearance officer was aware that Mr. Mumtaz had made previous visits to the United Kingdom, but his application for a visa had to be considered afresh and in the light of Mr. Mumtaz's present circumstances.
§ Mr. MaddenTo ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs why Mr. Nazar Hussein, reference No. V/3428/89, was refused a visa by the post in Islamabad to visit the United Kingdom; and if he will reconsider this case.
§ Mr. EggarMr. Nazar Hussein was refused entry clearance on 23 February 1989 as the entry clearance officer at Islamabad was not satisfied, as he is required to be under paragraph 17 of HC 169, that Mr. Hussein was a genuine visitor who would leave the United Kingdom at the end of his permitted stay. Mr. Hussein sought a two to three months stay to visit his brother who lives in this country. Mr. Hussein has a statutory right of appeal to an independent appellate authority within three months of the date of refusal. No such appeal had been lodged up to 22 March 1989.
§ Mr. WinnickTo ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) if he will describe the procedure adopted by the relevant immigration authorities when an appeal against entry clearance refusal has been upheld by an adjudicator; and if it is the practice to grant entry clearance when an appeal is so upheld;
(2) in what circumstances entry clearance will not be issued by the relevant immigration authorities once an appeal against refusal has been upheld on adjudication.
§ Mr. EggarEntry clearance officers (ECOs) have a statutory duty to comply with any written or oral 729W directions given by the appellate authorities in giving effect to a determination; where directed they will issue entry clearance immediately unless, in the case of an adjudicator's direction, it is subject to further appeal. Where, however, an adjudicator allows an appeal but gives no directions, the ECO will reconsider the application within the spirit of the adjudicator's determination and will issue entry clearance if the appellant meets the requirements of the immigration rules. If, because of changed circumstances, the appellant does not meet the requirements of the immigration rules, his application will be refused with a further right of appeal to the appellate authorities.
§ Mr. WinnickTo ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs in what circumstances an appellant whose appeal against entry had been upheld would be required by the immigration authorities to produce further documentary evidence; and in how many cases in 1987 and 1988 this was required.
§ Mr. EggarWhere an adjudicator allows an appeal but gives no directions, an entry clearance officer (ECO) may call for further documentary evidence to satisfy himself, within the spirit of the adjudicator's determination, that, notwithstanding changed circumstances, the appellant meets the requirements of the immigration rules. Details are not available of the number of cases in which this proved necessary.
§ Mr. WinnickTo ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what is the average time which elapses between an appeal against entry clearance being upheld by an adjudicator and entry clearance being issued by the relevant immigration authorities; and if he has taken steps to ensure that minimal delay occurs in successful appeal cases.
§ Mr. EggarAppeal determinations not subject to further appeal are normally sent by the Home Office to overseas posts within a maximum of two weeks of receipt from the appellate authorities. On receiving a determination the entry clearance officer (ECO) informs the appellant and, where directions are given by an adjudicator, entry clearance is issued as soon as the appellant presents his passport. I am satisfied that existing procedures ensure minimal delay.
§ Mr. WinnickTo ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what criticisms have been made by the immigration appeals tribunal over delays in appeals against entry clearance being upheld in the United Kingdom and the actual granting of entry clearance to successful appellants; and what steps have been taken to rectify such delays.
§ Mr. EggarNone. Where directed by an adjudicator an entry clearance officer (ECO) will issue entry clearance immediately. Where no directions are given an ECO will issue entry clearance as soon as he has satisfied himself, if necessary after further inquiries, that the appellant meets the requirements of the immigration rules.