![]() |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] [DONATE] | |||||||||
United Kingdom Asylum and Immigration Tribunal |
||||||||||
PLEASE SUPPORT BAILII & FREE ACCESS TO LAW
To maintain its current level of service, BAILII urgently needs the support of its users.
Since you use the site, please consider making a donation to celebrate BAILII's 25 years of providing free access to law. No contribution is too small. If every visitor this month gives just £5, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing this vital service.
Thank you for your support! | ||||||||||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> United Kingdom Asylum and Immigration Tribunal >> Secretary of State for the Home Department v V (Sri Lanka) [2004] UKIAT 00012 (10 February 2004) URL: https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKIAT/2004/00012.html Cite as: [2004] UKIAT 12, [2004] UKIAT 00012 |
[New search]
[Context]
[View without highlighting]
[Printable RTF version]
[Help]
APPEAL No. [2004] UKIAT 00012 V (Sri Lanka
)
Date of hearing: 15 January 2004
Date Determination notified: 10 February 2004
SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE HOME DEPARTMENT | APPELLANT |
and |
|
V | RESPONDENT |
"The Director explained that if a returnee were not wanted they would not be stopped at the airport. However when the CID are certain that the individual has committed or been convicted of an offence then they would be stopped. A computer holds the name, address and age of any wanted person."
"On the objective evidence before me there are substantial grounds for believing that on arrival at Colombo airport the appellant would be detained. She would not simply be a returned asylum seeker but a person who very recently has been in detention in that country for a specific reason, a reason that is identified by the authorities as a ground for taking an interest in its citizens, and had unlawfully escaped. (Our emphasis)
The appellant is still of interest to the authorities inSri Lanka
and as such is likely to be detained on return. There is substantial evidence about the likelihood of torture of detainees and therefore there is a real risk that the appellant will be tortured on her return. An added problem is that the appellant is recently delivered of a child and even if we were to ignore the pre
Sri Lanka
situation she is of a delicate mental condition."
"There has been a noticeable improvement in the human rights situation inSri Lanka
since the signing of the MOU in February 2002 and the subsequent peace talks. However, despite increased freedom of movement and other improvements, the human rights situation is still far from satisfactory. The checkpoints remain in place between the LTTE and government-controlled areas; political killings continue (especially in the east of the country); non-state actors continue to harass and extort taxes from the local population; and there seems to be widespread impunity for human rights violations.
The President declared a state of emergency on 6 November 2003. As a consequence of the declared state of emergency there was a noticeable increase of soldiers on patrol in many parts of the country, and ID checks were carried out in Colombo – and most likely also in other areas. Reports received by the Consortium of Humanitarian Agencies inSri Lanka
imply that the security forces at certain crossing points may be involved in imposing arbitrary and random restrictions on the freedom of movement of persons and goods, similar to that which existed before the ceasefire agreement in February 2002. The political leadership of the country has publicly stated that there will be no reversal of the peace process; however, these types of reports are an indication that fear is creeping back into society making the situation more volatile.
Although the declaration of a state of emergency has now been reversed, it is unclear how the present political power struggles, related both to the peace talks and other issues, will impact on the human rights situation. Given the present situation, we would strongly urge you to verge on the side of maximum caution in any Refugee Status Determination decisions.
In light of the foregoing, UNHCR maintains the view that although steps towards peace have been taken inSri Lanka
recently, it is still premature to advocate that the situation has reached a satisfactory level of safety to warrant the return of all unsuccessful asylum applicants to
Sri Lanka
. This caution is now also warranted by the uncertainty surrounding the effects of the recent Presidential decree imposing and then reversing a state of emergency in
Sri Lanka
.
The present political situation inSri Lanka
is very unstable. Although it is still too early to say what impact the new situation will have on the human rights situation, recent events have certainly reminded the population of the widespread impunity for human rights violations in the past – and this in itself makes the situation more prone to destabilisation."
J Barnes
Vice President