---

Asylum Seekers

That is an important point, to which I will return at the conclusion of my remarks. As Ministers will be aware, in 2004 the Medical Foundation for the Care of Victims of Torture prepared a report on allegations of harm by removals staff. In all 14 cases on which it reported, it carried out medical examinations, but it also found that, beyond the 14 cases that it investigated, there were other allegations of harm occurring in detention. As a result of the examination of the 14 cases, the foundation found a pattern of abuse and it highlighted four main issues: the use of inappropriate and unsafe methods of force that carry a higher-than-acceptable injury risk; the use of force even after the removal attempt had been terminated, often out of sight inside escort vehicles; the continued use of force even after the detainee had been restrained, through the use of handcuffs for instance; and the misuse of handcuffing. The foundation's analysis suggested that gratuitous force was being used. In four of the 14 cases that it considered, the people disclosed that they had been tortured in their country of origin, suggesting that their psychological state would have been affected by that further abuse. The Medical Foundation's report stated:"““The methods of restraint or assault described by the detainees include: being dragged along the ground, being kicked or kneed, being punched—including to the head and face, being elbowed, having the thumb forcibly bent back, pressure being applied to the angle of the jaw, pressure exerted on the neck, being sat on…and assault to the genitals.””" It raised specific concerns about the misuse of handcuffs, which can lead to nerve damage. There was evidence that physical force was used after handcuffs had been applied, which is considered unnecessary and dangerous. There were also reports of verbal and racial abuse during deportation. The Medical Foundation recommended that an automatic medical examination should take place of any individual who is the subject of a failed removal attempt. That has not happened. It recommended that, for allegations to be investigated properly, the victim should be allowed to stay in this country to pursue any legal course of action. That has not happened. Most important, it recommended that those involved in the physical removal of failed asylum seekers must receive comprehensive training in the proper use of restraint techniques. That is one of the issues on which I shall press the Minister today. In 2005, a report by the Campaign Against Racism and Fascism and the National Coalition of Anti-Deportation Campaigns documented 35 cases of abuse during removals that had been referred to solicitors firms. Most of the 35 allegations were against Group 4 and Loss Prevention International—two private companies involved in those removals. The majority of the incidents took place on the way to or at the airport. The injuries included cuts, swellings and bruises, nerve damage from handcuffs, sexual assault, groin damage, cracked shoulders, fractured fingers, psychological problems and serious head injuries. Most recently, campaigners on this issue believe that there may be 200 allegations of abuse. Let me talk about a particular case, which received some publicity. Beatrice is an asylum seeker from Cameroon who has a history of psychological problems and suicide attempts following the murder of her husband in Cameroon. She was taken from Yarl's Wood detention centre and put on a plane in handcuffs and leg bindings. She alleges that when she complained of feeling unwell, one officer said to her, ““If you do not go quietly, we will beat you.”” Another said, ““I'm very sorry, but I have to do it. If we don't bring you to Cameroon, they won't pay us.”” Her head was forced between her knees and covered with a jacket. An escort clamped his hand over her mouth and kicked her legs. When they arrived in Paris for a stopover, she saw two French policemen and tried to escape, but was tripped over. Two policemen held her down on the floor. As she struggled, she was kneed in the groin so hard that blood poured from between her legs. During the consequent flight to Cameroon, Beatrice suffered five panic attacks. When the plane arrived, a British policeman who happened to be on the flight, together with two other passengers, reported her to the Cameroonian officials because she seemed so unwell. When asked to walk unaided, she collapsed. She alleges that the escort team attempted to bribe the Cameroonian immigration officials to take her but they refused. She was eventually returned to Heathrow in a wheelchair and immediately taken to Hillingdon hospital, where she was treated for severe genital bleeding and multiple bruising. A psychiatrist said that she was ““traumatised by events””. In October, an immigration judge ruled against the Home Office and released her on bail. I would like to think that that was an unusual case and that the officials involved have been disciplined or reprimanded in some way. I would like to hear from Ministers what has happened. Nobody, not even a failed asylum seeker, should be treated in that way. No woman should be treated in that way by people acting for a British Government. It is not necessary and it makes a mockery of our claims to be a country that subscribes to human rights and the various human rights conventions. The National Coalition of Anti-Deportation Campaigns, along with the organisation Medical Justice, is currently compiling a dossier of such cases. As I said earlier, they estimate that about 200 cases are known to various asylum rights groups, solicitors groups and visitors groups, and that number is by no means exhaustive. They passed 10 cases to The Independent newspaper, who reported on some of them. Three cases have been passed to the Home Office. The Home Office asked to see all 200 cases. However, I would say to Ministers that there are serious problems about passing cases on and the campaign groups involved are unwilling to do so without assurances that the victim's name will not be made public without their consent and that the victims will not come to any harm by the Home Office or its contractors.