asylum

Peru severs relations with Mexico for granting asylum to ex-PM

Pedro Castillo — seen here at the 76th Session of the U.N. General Assembly on September 21, 2021, speaking as the president of Peru — is facing charges in connection to his attempt to dissolve the country’s congress in 2022 and rule by emergency order. The prime minister during his time in office, Betssy Chavez Chino, has sought diplomatic asylum from Mexico. Pool File Photo by Mary Altaffer/UPI | License Photo

Nov. 4 (UPI) — Peru is severing diplomatic relations with Mexico over its granting of diplomatic asylum to a former prime minister accused of being involved in a coup attempt in 2022.

The Peruvian Foreign Ministry announced it was ending diplomatic relations with Mexico in a Monday evening communication, accusing the North American nation of “interfering in an inadmissible and systematic manner in Peru’s internal affairs.”

According to the communication, Mexico informed Peru that former Prime Minister Betssy Chavez Chino had sought refuge at its embassy in Lima and was granted political asylum.

Peru’s Foreign Ministry said it was “an unfriendly act that adds to the series of unacceptable interferences by the Mexican government toward Peru” and demonstrates its “profound lack of interest in maintaining a relationship” with Lima.

“Consequently, the government of the Republic of Peru has decided to break diplomatic relations with the United Mexican States,” it said.

Chavez was prime minister under President Pedro Castillo, who was impeached after trying to dissolve Congress and impose an emergency government to rule by decree in December 2022. He has been held in preventive detention since then on corruption and rebellion-related charges.

The former prime minister had been jailed from June 2023 over her alleged role in the coup until September, when she was released by a judge who ruled her right “not to suffer arbitrary detentions” had been violated.

Mexico’s Foreign Ministry said Peru’s decision to sever diplomatic relations was “excessive and disproportionate.”

In defense of granting Chavez asylum, Mexico said it did so in adherence to international law, in particular the 1954 Convention on Diplomatic Asylum, which both countries are party to.

“Mrs. Chavez Chino has mentioned that she has been the subject of repeated violations of her human rights as part of a political persecution of the Peruvian state since the moment of her capture in 2023,” the ministry said in a statement.

Mexico said its decision followed a “thorough evaluation and in strict compliance with the procedure established for this purpose in the Law on Refugees, Complementary Protection and Political Asylum” as well as in accordance with Mexican law.

“Mexico reaffirms, as has been recognized by the General Assembly of the United Nations, that the granting of asylum cannot be considered an unfriendly act by another state.”

Source link

Peru cuts ties with Mexico over asylum for ex-prime minister | News

Move comes after Betssy Chavez, who is on trial on coup charges, fled to the Mexican Embassy in Peru.

Peru has severed diplomatic relations with Mexico after accusing it of granting asylum to a former Peruvian prime minister who is on trial over an alleged coup attempt in 2022.

The announcement on Monday came hours after former Prime Minister Betssy Chavez – who served under former President Pedro Castillo – fled to the Mexican Embassy in Peru.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

“Today we learned with surprise and deep regret that Betssy Chavez, the alleged co-author of the coup attempt by former President Pedro Castillo, is being granted asylum at the Mexican Embassy residence in Peru,” Minister of Foreign Affairs Hugo de Zela told a news conference.

“Given this unfriendly act, and considering the repeated instances in which the current and former presidents of that country have interfered in Peru’s internal affairs, the Peruvian government has decided to sever diplomatic relations with Mexico today,” he added.

There was no immediate comment from Mexico.

Chavez’s lawyer, Raul Noblecilla, told local radio station RPP that he had not heard from his client in several days and was unaware of whether she had requested asylum.

Chavez, who served in Castillo’s cabinet as Minister of Culture, was appointed as prime minister in November 2022 amid a months-long standoff between the president and the Congress.

Castillo – a former rural schoolteacher and trade unionist, dubbed Peru’s “first poor president” – was impeached by lawmakers the following month when he attempted to dissolve the Congress.

Relations between Lima and Mexico deteriorated sharply afterwards.

Following his impeachment, Castillo was on his way to the Mexican embassy in Lima to request asylum when he was arrested and charged with rebellion and abuse of authority.

Chavez was charged alongside him.

In December 2022, Peru expelled Mexico’s ambassador after Mexico granted asylum to Castillo’s wife and children.

Castillo’s successor, then-President Dina Boluarte, also temporarily recalled Peru’s ambassador to Mexico City in February 2023, accusing then-left-wing president Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador of meddling in her country’s affairs for expressing support for Castillo.

The former president and Chavez went on trial in March of this year.

While Castillo has been in preventive custody since his impeachment, Chavez was released on bail in September.

Prosecutors had sought a 25-year term for Chavez for allegedly participating in Castillo’s plan to dissolve Congress.

They have sought a 34-year sentence for Castillo.

The pair has denied the charges.

Source link

What are the government’s options on asylum seeker accommodation?

Jack FenwickPolitical correspondent

PA Media Channel migrants step onto the dock from a UK Border Force boat in Dover, Kent. The picture shows several migrants, wearing life jackets, being escorted from a boat by several officials wearing high-vis jackets.PA Media

Where to house asylum seekers has become one of the fiercest topics of political debate since last year’s general election.

Small boat crossings have reached near-record levels and MPs on the Home Affairs Select Committee said the Home Office had squandered billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money on asylum accommodation.

The estimated cost of the government’s 10-year asylum accommodation contracts has more than tripled, from £4.5bn to £15.3bn.

Ministers inside the Home Office believe that ultimately this issue can only be solved by increasing removals of failed asylum seekers and deterring people from arriving on small boats in the first place.

But while they attempt to implement policies to achieve those aims, the Home Office still has to find somewhere for the tens of thousands of people seeking asylum to stay.

Arrival

When people arrive in the UK by crossing the Channel on small boats, they are generally sent to a processing centre at Manston in Kent.

The site is located on the former RAF Manston base and was opened by the Home Office in February 2022 as a response to the increasing number of arrivals.

Migrants are supposed to be held there for 24 hours, while officials carry out security and identity checks, but overcrowding has sometimes led to people being forced to stay on the site for weeks.

In late 2022, thousands of migrants were placed in tents at Manston, leading to overcrowding and disease, including diphtheria.

A Home Office inquiry is currently taking place into the conditions at Manston.

The department is also seeking planning approval to improve the site and use it for processing asylum seekers into the 2030s.

Initial accommodation

After leaving Manston, asylum seekers are then sent to initial accommodation provided by the Home Office, while officials decide whether they are eligible for further support.

These are supposed to be centres managed by specialist migrant help staff, but many asylum seekers are instead sent to hotels or hostels straight away.

There are 1,750 places available in initial accommodation and the latest government data showed 1,665 of those places were occupied in June.

Most asylum seekers will then be sent to longer-term accommodation, where they will stay while their asylum claim is being processed.

Flats and HMOs

Under the contracts signed by the Home Office, asylum seekers are supposed to be housed in so-called dispersal accommodation.

These are self-catered properties within communities and are usually local flats or houses in multiple occupation (HMOs), a type of rented accommodation where at least three individuals share the use of a bathroom and kitchen.

The average cost of housing an asylum seeker in dispersal accommodation is £23.25 a night, making it by far the cheapest option.

In 2019, the government signed 10-year contracts with three companies – Serco, Mears and Clearsprings – and tasked them with finding properties that can be used for dispersal accommodation.

But since the number of small boat crossings began to rise significantly in 2022, there’s been a shortage of this type of accommodation.

Finding more of these properties became a big priority for the former Home Secretary Yvette Cooper and the latest government data shows that 66,234 people were in dispersal accommodation in June – around two-thirds of the total number of asylum seekers being housed.

But the three companies tasked with finding these properties can make bigger profits from other types of accommodation – and the contracts drawn up by the Home Office don’t include any penalties for the companies when they fail to hit their targets.

Dispersal accommodation can impact local housing markets by effectively taking flats or HMOs out of general supply, something the Home Office acknowledges would cause frustrations within communities.

Some concerns have been raised that protests targeting this type of accommodation could be difficult to police.

A bar chart showing the number of people in asylum accommodation between December 2022 and June 2025. The numbers rise from about 45,000 to a peak of 56,000 in September 2023 before falling to 30,000 in June 2024. There is a slight rise then before a drop in June 2025 to the current total of about 32,000

Hotels

Hotels were only ever meant to be used as a stop-gap option when there was a temporary shortage of other accommodation.

But increasing numbers of migrants crossing the Channel in small boats has meant hotels have become a regular, expensive and highly controversial feature of the UK’s asylum accommodation system.

They have led to soaring costs for the taxpayer and large profits for the three companies providing the accommodation.

The average cost of housing an asylum seeker in a hotel is £144.98 a night, more than six times the price of dispersal accommodation.

One of the reasons hotels are so much more expensive than other accommodation is because the asylum seekers being housed there are also given food.

Under the contracts drawn up by the Home Office, providers are still paid even if the rooms are vacant.

Asylum hotel use peaked under the Conservatives in September 2023 when 56,042 people were being housed.

Latest government statistics show there were 32,059 asylum seekers being housed in hotels at the end of June – much lower than the peak, but 8% higher than when Labour came to power.

The Home Office removed the need to consult local authorities about hotel use in 2020 and they’ve become lightning rods for protests.

Sir Keir Starmer has pledged to end the use of hotels to house asylum seekers by 2029, but achieving that target will be a tough ask.

Large sites

Both Conservative and Labour governments have experimented with using larger sites to house asylum seekers.

Hundreds of asylum seekers could be placed in disused military sites, as part of efforts to achieve the prime minister’s pledge to end hotel use.

Ministers hope to move asylum seekers into sites in Inverness and East Sussex by the end of next month, with discussions between the Home Office and the Ministry of Defence ongoing about other potential locations.

The Home Affairs Select Committee has said that large sites such as these will not enable the government to drive down costs of asylum accommodation.

The idea is also likely to be highly controversial in the local communities where the sites are chosen, but the Home Office hopes that military sites could act as a deterrent to people thinking of crossing the Channel.

Disused military land has in the past been earmarked for housebuilding, but plans to build on these sites have repeatedly gone awry.

The government has indicated that other disused sites such as empty tower blocks, student accommodation and industrial sites could also be used to house asylum seekers.

What happens next?

The government’s contracts with Serco, Mears and Clearsprings run until 2029, but have break clauses which the government could trigger in March next year.

Home Office ministers wanted to trigger break clauses in the previous set of contracts, but the department hadn’t left itself enough time to plan for an alternative accommodation system.

The housing department has been working with local councils to explore what that alternative system could look like.

But some within the Home Office do not believe that an alternative would be ready by March and as recently as May, it was understood that there was no plan to trigger the break clauses next year.

The Home Office needs to save £1bn from the cost of asylum accommodation by 2029, otherwise it may have to find cuts in other areas of its budget.

Source link

Two military sites named as ministers aim to close asylum hotels

Hundreds of asylum seekers could be housed in two military sites in Inverness and East Sussex as the government aims to end the use of hotels.

Discussions are under way over the use of the sites to accommodate 900 men, as first reported in the Times.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has instructed Home Office and Ministry of Defence officials to accelerate work to locate appropriate military sites, the BBC understands.

The government has pledged to end the use of asylum hotels, which have cost billions of pounds and become a focal point for anti-migrant protests, by the next election.

Migrants are due to be housed in the Cameron Barracks in Inverness and Crowborough army training camp in East Sussex by the end of next month, under plans being drawn up by ministers.

Defence Minister Luke Pollard told BBC Breakfast that the sites were not “luxury accommodation by any means,” but “adequate for what is required”.

“That will enable us to take the pressure off the asylum hotel estate and enable those to be closed at a faster rate,” he said.

Pressed on whether military sites would be cheaper for the government than hotels, Pollard said the cost was currently being assessed and that “it depends on the base”.

He said: “But I think there’s something that is of greater significance that we’ve seen over the past few months, and that is the absolute public appetite to see every asylum hotel closed.”

Pollard would not be drawn on how many asylum seekers were to be moved or when that would happen.

He said there would have to be sufficient engagement with local authorities and adequate security arrangements in place. “Those conversations have been going on for some time now,” he added.

Inverness’s Liberal Democrat MP Angus MacDonald told the BBC he supported the use of military sites to house asylum seekers, but that the chosen base seemed “a bit odd” given it is in the town centre.

“It’s effectively the same,” he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, adding that to his knowledge it was an open barracks without security.

“I very much thought the idea of putting them in army camps was to have them out of town, and make them less of an issue for the local population.”

He said he had first been given a “tip-off” about the use of Cameron Barracks about a month ago by someone in the army, when its occupants had been given notice to leave, and recently learned the plan was to house 300 asylum seekers there.

MacDonald added that Scotland did not have a “great track record” of migrants staying put there – and that the Home Office would need to consider whether they would “just up sticks and leave”.

Ministers are also considering industrial sites, temporary accommodation and otherwise disused accommodation to house asylum seekers.

Government sources told the BBC that all sites would comply with health and safety standards.

A Home Office spokesperson said: ”We are furious at the level of illegal migrants and asylum hotels.

“This government will close every asylum hotel. Work is well under way, with more suitable sites being brought forward to ease pressure on communities and cut asylum costs.”

Around 32,000 asylum seekers are currently being accommodated in hotels, a drop from a peak of more than 56,000 in 2023 but 2,500 more than last year.

A report on Monday found billions of taxpayers’ money had been “squandered” on asylum accommodation.

The Home Affairs Committee said “flawed contracts” and “incompetent delivery” had resulted in the Home Office relying on hotels as “go-to solutions” rather than temporary stop-gaps, with expected costs tripling to more than £15bn.

Commenting on the report’s findings, Sir Keir said he was “determined” to close all asylum hotels, adding: “I can’t tell you how frustrated and angry I am that we’ve been left with a mess as big as this by the last government.”

Two former military sites – MDP Wethersfield, a former RAF base in Essex, and Napier Barracks, a former military base in Kent – are already being used to house asylum seekers after being opened under the previous Tory government.

Source link

Manhunt for asylum seeker jailed for sexual assault mistakenly released

André Rhoden-Paul,

Shivani Chaudhari and

Ellena Cruse

Video appears to show mistakenly released hotel asylum seeker in Chelmsford

Police have launched a manhunt after a former asylum seeker who sexually assaulted a 14-year-old girl was mistakenly released from prison.

Ethiopian national Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu, who arrived in the UK on a small boat, was jailed for 12 months over the attack in Epping, Essex, last month.

Prison sources said Kebatu was meant to be sent to an immigration detention centre ahead of a planned deportation. An investigation has been launched by the Prison Service, and an officer has been removed from discharging duties while it takes place.

Essex Police said “fast-paced enquiries have shown that the man boarded a London-bound train at Chelmsford Railway Station at 12:41 BST”.

Justice Secretary David Lammy said he was “appalled at the release in error at HMP Chelmsford”.

Speaking to the media, Lammy said Essex Police, the Metropolitan Police and British Transport Police were working together on the case and conducting a joint manhunt.

“All hands are on deck… to use all intelligence to get him out of this country,” he said.

Lammy said he was “livid on behalf of the public” about the accidental release of the sex offender and former asylum seeker Hadush Kebatu”.

He confirmed Kebatu had boarded a train at about lunchtime and was “at large in London”. He also said a prison officer had been suspended.

A “full and immediate investigation” into the circumstances surrounding the release has been launched. He said the situation was “very serious”.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said Kebatu “must be caught and deported for his crimes”.

Essex Police Custody shot of Hadush KebatuEssex Police

Kebatu’s arrest had sparked protests outside The Bell Hotel in Epping, where he had been living.

In September, Chelmsford Magistrates’ Court heard Kebatu tried to kiss the teenage girl on a bench and made numerous sexually explicit comments on 7 July.

The following day, he encountered the same girl and tried to kiss her before sexually assaulting her. He also sexually assaulted a woman who had offered to help him create a CV to find work.

In September, after being found guilty of five offences, he was sentenced to 12 months and given a five-year sexual harm prevention order, which banned him from approaching or contacting any female.

During the trial, Kebatu gave his date of birth as December 1986, making him 38, but court records suggested he was 41.

He was also made to sign the Sex Offenders Register for 10 years.

Stuart Woodward/BBC A police car parked outside Chelmsford Railway Station. The sun is setting into the photo.Stuart Woodward/BBC

Essex Police said the man had boarded a train heading into London about midday

A Prison Service spokesperson said: “We are urgently working with police to return an offender to custody following a release in error at HMP Chelmsford.

“Public protection is our top priority, and we have launched an investigation into this incident.”

A spokesperson for Essex Police said it was informed by the prison services about “an error” to do with “the release of an individual” at 12:57.

“As a result of that, we have launched a search operation to locate them and are working closely with partner agencies,” they added.

“These fast-paced enquiries have shown that the man boarded a London-bound train at Chelmsford Railway Station at 12:41.

“We understand the concern the public would have regarding this situation and can assure you we have officers working to urgently locate and detain him.”

Writing in a post on X, Lammy said: “We are urgently working with the police to track him down, and I’ve ordered an urgent investigation.

“Kebatu must be deported for his crimes, not on our streets.”

Sir Keir said the mistaken release was “totally unacceptable”.

Writing on X, he added: “I am appalled that it has happened, and it’s being investigated.

“The police are working urgently to track him down, and my government is supporting them. This man must be caught and deported for his crimes.”

Watch: Bodycam footage shows Hadush Kebatu’s arrest

Chelmsford’s Liberal Democrat MP Marie Goldman called for a rapid public inquiry into how the mistaken release, first reported by The Sun, happened.

“This is utterly unacceptable and has potentially put my constituents in danger,” she said. “I expect answers from the Prison Service.”

Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said the “entire system is collapsing under Labour”.

“Conservatives voted against Labour’s prisoner release program because it was putting predators back on our streets,” she said on X.

“But this man has only just been convicted. A level of incompetence that beggars belief.”

Reform UK leader Nigel Farage said: “He is now walking the streets of Essex. Britain is broken.”

Source link

Asylum seekers face deportation over failure to pay new fees — before being notified

Late last month, an immigrant seeking asylum in the U.S. came across social media posts urging her to pay a new fee imposed by the Trump administration before Oct. 1, or else risk her case being dismissed.

Paula, a 40-year-old Los Angeles-area immigrant from Mexico, whose full name The Times is withholding because she fears retribution, applied for asylum in 2021 and her case is now on appeal.

But when Paula tried to pay the $100 annual fee, she couldn’t find an option on the immigration court’s website that accepted fees for pending asylum cases. Afraid of deportation — and with just five hours before the payment deadline — she selected the closest approximation she could find, $110 for an appeal filed before July 7.

She knew it was likely incorrect. Still, she felt it was better to pay for something, rather than nothing at all, as a show of good faith. Unable to come up with the money on such short notice, Paula, who works in a warehouse repairing purses, paid the fee with a credit card.

“I hope that money isn’t wasted,” she said.

That remains unclear because of confusion and misinformation surrounding the rollout of a host of new fees or fee increases for a variety of immigration services. The fees are part of the sweeping budget bill President Trump signed into law in July.

Paula was one of thousands of asylum seekers across the country who panicked after seeing messages on social media urging them to pay the new fee before the start of the new fiscal year on Oct. 1.

But government messaging about the fees has sometimes been chaotic and contradictory, immigration attorneys say. Some asylum seekers have received notice about the fees, while others have not. Misinformation surged as immigrants scrambled to figure out whether, and how, to pay.

Advocates worry the confusion serves as a way for immigration officials to dismiss more asylum cases, which would render the applicants deportable.

The fees vary. For those seeking asylum, there is a $100 fee for new applications, as well as a yearly fee of $100 for pending applications. The fee for an initial work permit is $550 and work permit renewals can be as much as $795.

Amy Grenier, associate director of government relations at the American Immigration Lawyers Assn., said that not having a clear way to pay a fee might seem like a small government misstep, but the legal consequences are substantial.

For new asylum applications, she said, some immigration judges set a payment deadline of Sept. 30, even though the Executive Office for Immigration Review only updated the payment portal in the last week of September.

“The lack of coherent guidance and structure to pay the fee only compounded the inefficiency of our immigration courts,” Grenier said. “There are very real consequences for asylum-seekers navigating this completely unnecessary bureaucratic mess.”

Two agencies collect the asylum fees: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), under the Department of Homeland Security, and the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR), under the Department of Justice, which operates immigration courts.

Both agencies initially released different instructions regarding the fees, and only USCIS has provided an avenue for payment.

The departments of Homeland Security and Justice didn’t respond to a request for comment. The White House deferred to USCIS.

USCIS spokesman Matthew J. Tragesser said the asylum fee is being implemented consistent with the law.

“The real losers in this are the unscrupulous and incompetent immigration attorneys who exploit their clients and bog down the system with baseless asylum claims,” he said.

The Asylum Seeker Advocacy Project (ASAP), a national membership organization, sued the Trump administration earlier this month after thousands of members shared their confusion over the new fees, arguing that the federal agencies involved “threaten to deprive asylum seekers of full and fair consideration of their claims.”

The organization also argued the fees shouldn’t apply to people whose cases were pending before Trump signed the budget package into law.

In a U.S. district court filing Monday, Justice Department lawyers defended the fees, saying, “Congress made clear that these new asylum fees were long overdue and necessary to recover the growing costs of adjudicating the millions of pending asylum applications.”

Some of the confusion resulted from contradictory information.

A notice by USCIS in the July 22 Federal Register confused immigrants and legal practitioners alike because of a reference to Sept. 30. Anyone who had applied for asylum as of Oct. 1, 2024, and whose application was still pending by Sept. 30, was instructed to pay a fee. Some thought the notice meant that Sept. 30 was the deadline to pay the yearly asylum fee.

By this month, USCIS clarified on its website that it will “issue personal notices” alerting asylum applicants when their annual fee is due, how to pay it and the consequences for failing to do so.

The agency created a payment portal and began sending out notices Oct. 1, instructing recipients to pay within 30 days.

But many asylum seekers are still waiting to be notified by USCIS, according to ASAP, the advocacy organization. Some have received texts or physical mail telling them to check their USCIS account, while others have resorted to checking their accounts daily.

Meanwhile the Executive Office for Immigration Review (EOIR) didn’t add a mechanism for paying the $100 fee for pending asylum cases — the one Paula hoped to pay — until Thursday.

In its Oct. 3 complaint, lawyers for ASAP wrote: “Troublingly, ASAP has received reports that some immigration judges at EOIR are already requiring applicants to have paid the annual asylum fee, and in at least one case even rejected an asylum application and ordered an asylum seeker removed for non-payment of the annual asylum fee, despite the agency providing no way to pay this fee.”

An immigration lawyer in San Diego, who asked not to be named out of fear of retribution, said an immigration judge denied his client’s asylum petition because the client had not paid the new fee, even though there was no way to pay it.

The judge issued an order, which was shared with The Times, that read, “Despite this mandatory requirement, to date the respondents have not filed proof of payment for the annual asylum fee.”

The lawyer called the decision a due process violation. He said he now plans to appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals, though another fee increase under Trump’s spending package raised that cost from $110 to $1,010. He is litigating the case pro bono.

Justice Department lawyers said Monday that EOIR had eliminated the initial inconsistency by revising its position to reflect that of USCIS and will soon send out official notices to applicants, giving them 30 days to make the payment.

“There was no unreasonable delay here in EOIR’s implementation,” the filing said. “…The record shows several steps were required to finalize EOIR’s process, including coordination with USCIS. Regardless, Plaintiff’s request is now moot.”

Immigrants like Paula, who is a member of ASAP, recently got some reassurance. In a court declaration, EOIR Director Daren Margolin wrote that for anyone who made anticipatory or advance payments for the annual asylum fee, “those payments will be applied to the alien’s owed fees, as appropriate.”

Source link

Immigration judge denies Kilmar Abrego Garcia’s bid for asylum

A U.S. immigration judge on Wednesday denied a bid for asylum from Kilmar Abrego Garcia, whose case has become a proxy for the partisan power struggle over immigration policy.

The judge in the Baltimore immigration court denied an application to reopen Abrego Garcia’s 2019 asylum case, but that is not the final word. Abrego Garcia has 30 days to appeal to the Board of Immigration Appeals.

The Salvadoran national has an American wife and children and has lived in Maryland for years, but he originally immigrated to the U.S. illegally as a teenager. In 2019, he was arrested by immigration agents. He requested asylum but was not eligible because he had been in the country for more than a year. However, the judge ruled that he could not be deported to El Salvador, where he faced danger from a gang that targeted his family.

When he was mistakenly deported to El Salvador in March and kept in a notorious prison, his case became a rallying point for those who opposed President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown. Facing a ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court, Trump’s Republican administration returned Abrego Garcia to the U.S. in June, only to immediately charge him with human smuggling.

While he faces those criminal charges in Tennessee, based on a 2022 traffic stop, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement is also seeking to deport him to a third country, proposing Uganda first and then Eswatini.

Loller writes for the Associated Press. Loller reported from Nashville, Tenn.

Source link

PM wants to change how international law used in asylum cases

Sam FrancisPolitical reporter

Watch: Starmer says he will “look again” at human rights laws

Sir Keir Starmer wants to change how international law is interpreted, to stop unsuccessful asylum seekers blocking their deportation on the grounds they could be sent to worse prisons or healthcare systems.

The prime minister told the BBC he did not want to “tear down” human rights laws, but is ready to look again at article three of the European Convention on Human Rights, which protects against torture and degrading treatment.

The prime minister said mass migration in recent years meant there needed to be a change, but those genuinely fleeing persecution should still be given asylum.

His comments came after his home secretary set out plans to tighten rules for migrants seeking indefinite leave to remain.

Speaking to Radio 4’s Today programme, Sir Keir said there was a difference between deporting someone to “summary execution” and sending them to somewhere with a different level of healthcare or prison conditions.

He added “we need to look again at the interpretation” of a wide range of international laws by UK courts.

He warned that laws must be “applied in the circumstances as they are now” before adding that countries were experiencing “mass migration in a way that we have not seen in previous years”.

To meet this new challenge “we need to look at again at the interpretation of some of these provisions, not tear them down”, he said.

On the issue of deportation, he was asked about the example of a Brazilian paedophile who successfully claimed he would be treated worse in a Brazilian prison than he would in a British prison.

The prime minister drew a line between deporting someone to “summary execution” and claims based on worse healthcare or prison conditions abroad.

“I believe that those genuinely fleeing persecution should be afforded asylum and that is a compassionate act,” he added.

Pressed for details about what was blocking deportations of foreign criminals, Sir Keir cited Articles 3 and 8 of the ECHR – which ban torture and protect the right to private and family life respectively.

“But it’s more than that,” he said, pointing to the UN’s Refugee Convention, Torture Convention and Convention on the Rights of the Child as potential barriers.

Ministers were already exploring ways to tighten the interpretation of some aspects of the ECHR to crack down on immigration.

In May, the government’s immigration white paper promised legislation to “clarify” how the right to a family life in European human rights law should apply to immigration cases.

Before being made foreign secretary, Yvette Cooper ordered home officials to look into how courts used laws that halted deportations on torture grounds.

Sir Keir’s comments come after a Labour conference dominated by efforts to confront Reform UK.

The prime minister used his keynote speech to cast Nigel Farage’s movement as practising the “politics of grievance” and to position Labour as the party of “tolerant, decent” patriotism.

He stopped short in the speech of repeating his attack on Reform’s deportation proposals as “racist” but vowed to fight racist rhetoric “with everything we have”.

Sir Keir has also spent the conference contending with a provocative challenge to his leadership by Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham who said Labour MPs had asked him all summer to return to Westminster and take over as prime minister.

Asked about internal challenges to his leadership, Sir Keir said he had “been underestimated every time” he had taken on a senior role.

Despite this, “I pushed through the barriers,” he said.

Sir Keir told the BBC: “I didn’t come into politics as some sort of popularity contest.

“I came in with one focus, which is changing my country for the better.

“I’m proud to be prime minister, getting on with that work.”

During a wide-ranging interview, Sir Keir also said it was “wrong” that thousands of young people remained out of work because of mental problems.

“I’m not saying you don’t and shouldn’t have benefits for mental health issues but I do think we need to examine this quite carefully,” he added.

“I say it because if you are on benefits, in your 20s, it is going to be extremely difficult to get off benefits for the rest of your life.”

Speaking to BBC Breakfast, he added he was committed getting “bills down for those at home and for businesses,” as energy costs increase by 2% from Wednesday for millions of people in England, Wales and Scotland, as regulator Ofgem’s latest price cap come into effect.

But Richard Fuller, shadow chief secretary to the Treasury said Labour was “getting ready to wack people with higher taxes” at the Budget, which will be unveiled in November.

Thin, red banner promoting the Politics Essential newsletter with text saying, “Top political analysis in your inbox every day”. There is also an image of the Houses of Parliament.

Source link