health care, on site". But they do say: ".. it is wrong to suggest that asylum seekers are any more likely to commit crimes than anyone else. There is no evidence to support this". But the burden of the briefing is clear. The government "strategy" is to play the far right at their own game and at the same time develop their existing policies of reducing even further the human rights of asylum seekers:
"The centres will have clear rules, including residence and reporting requirements, and residents will have good reason to follow them. Anyone who breaks the rules will be liable to lose support. Breaking the rules may also affect their claim for asylum".
In reality, accommodation centres represent another expansion of immigration detention. That is why we need to continue to campaign against them and for the end of all detention of asylum seekers. Sarah Parker On Thursday May I the Court of Appeal confirmed its previous decision to look at various issues raised by Mrs Ay's case, and refused the Home Office's application to overturn its previous decision.
To get this far, Mrs Ay's solicitor had to get a court order preventing the Home Office from removing Mrs Ay and her children to Germany before the Court of Appeal gave its decision, so keen was the Home Office to get them out of the coun try.
The case was to have been heard on Wednesday May 14 along with points raised by the cases of two other asylum seekers. But on May 12, the hearing was postponed due to lack of court space. No new date has yet been announced.
Defend asylum and immigration
rights
When the case is heard the main point will be whether an adjudicator may legitimately take a different view from the Home Secretary of certain legal tests, especially of the weight to be given to the interests of children, in deciding an asylum application.
Mrs Ay's supporters hope that the hearing will result in her being allowed to have her case heard in detail by an adjudicator, which has not happened so far. This is because Home Secretary David Blunkett Europe. certified the case as "manifestly unfounded", thus depriving her of the right to a full hearing of the substantive issues. Meanwhile protests are increasing, especially in Scotland, focusing on the scandal of holding children in detention centres, often for long periods. The family has received a lot of sympathetic coverage both in the Scottish media and The Guardian and Independent.
In the debate on the Select Committee Report, Immigration Minister Beverley Hughes referred to the Ay family, saying "the case is exceptional" and "We have to remove this family".
In fact they are a very ordinary family; the parents left the Kurdish area of Turkey in 1988 during the war, and like thousands of other refugees were refused asylum in
Beverley Hughes intends that the family should share the fate of thousands of others in the coming years: to be returned to Turkey, and out of sight and critical internatinal attention. This will enable European governments to continue to remain close to Turkey and sell weapons and useless infrastructure projects without taking any responsibility for the hunger and human rights abuses so common there.
page 13 of the scan
Protestors against immigration detention (left) outside Yarl's Wood (right) outside the 1998 trial of nine Campsfield detainees MENTION IS * UPHOLD THE
Geneva Concation
STOP ARBITRAR CARMON TO SOF ANGERARY 900 MEN MOMEN DETENTONS AI THAS WOOD CHILDREN NOT EV
ACCUSED OF A CRE
07786 51319 OU nce June 2003 13
DKUP
THE ACHARÇES