Showing posts with label asylum. Show all posts
Showing posts with label asylum. Show all posts

Thursday, 8 July 2010

I'd Like To Claim Asylum Somewhere Where The Express Isn't Published

The Daily Express. It's never been a paper I've had much time for. Even during my time as a paper boy, it barely featured as hardly anyone ordered it. But as an avid Private Eye reader, it's nonsense stories and colourful owner often have me raising an eyebrow.

Well it's set a new precedent today when not only were BOTH eyebrows raised at once by the front page, but also my blood pressure and bad temper noticeably increased.

Their story, as shown on the right, was regarding the welcome news that it's not acceptable to send someone to a country where they might face torture, imprisonment or execution just for being themselves.

Lord Rodger's comments, quoted in the article, have been condemned; however I feel that whilst unhelpful, his analogy was innocent and he admitted they were stereotypical. But the coverage of the news by the loony papers has not just been unhelpful it has been both prejudiced and baffling.

The main issue for the Express, and it's sister the Daily Star ("No Room For Gays"), is not that the asylum seekers are gay. It's in fact mainly just that they are asylum seekers, and that now they fear (as always) our country is about to be overrun by asylum seekers claiming to be gay.

Of course we have two issues with that 1) what's their alternative? Send people off to be killed just in case someone gets in by incorrectly claiming they were gay? The cost/benefit of that are pretty damn clear to a sensible person! 2) how many people will use that excuse? I can see it being interesting culturally for some to claim they are gay when they aren't. I suspect it won't be an issue.

So what we have is scaremongering, on the most disgusting level, in order to keep out the "dirty foreigners". These people will happily have blood on their hands just because they don't like people who aren't like them. Disgraceful. Disturbing. So no surprise there from these papers then...

If you feel benevolent and particularly generous, this writer always appreciates things bought for him from his wishlist

Wednesday, 7 July 2010

Coalition LGBT Polices: Asylum. Check!

The Government's paper "Working For LGBT Equality" has gone from theory to reality today, following a Supreme Court ruling stating that returning LGB (not T) asylum seekers to their home countries where they might face murder, torture and/or imprisonment was wrong.

The decision overturns an earlier decision by the Court of Appeal that the Government could return two gay asylum-seekers, identified as HJ and HT, to Iran and Cameroon, where homosexuality is illegal, on the basis that they could be expected to act "discreetly" so as to avoid persecution.

In Iran, homosexuality regularly leads to the death penalty, whilst in Cameroon, it is punishable by up to five years in prison. HT had been severely beaten and cut with a knife by neighbours and police and was hospitalised for 2 months before escaping to the UK.

The London office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) intervened in the appeal to the Supreme Court on behalf of the appellants. A team from Baker & McKenzie acted for UNHCR on a pro bono basis.

Baker & McKenzie Associate Iona Harding, who ran the case, said: "This is an excellent result which will ensure that lesbian, gay and bisexual people receive the protection they are entitled to as refugees in the UK and are not expected to hide their identity in order to escape execution, long prison sentences or other forms of persecution." Pink Paper

Why was this case brought to court if the Coalition are already supportive of the outcome? Because the policy was enforced, and defended, by the last Labour Government during which this case was started. Yet another sign of the fact that whilst Labour talked big on LGBT rights, they often acted differently.

And, in even better news, the Coalition plan to ensure that this policy is extended to transgendered people too which is more than the ruling requires.

That's 1 - 0 to the Coalition on LGBT rights. Let's hope they can keep it up.

If you feel benevolent and particularly generous, this writer always appreciates things bought for him from his wishlist