From
Lord Avebury to Immigration Minister Lord Rooker
(1)
December
28, 2001
I
write to ask if you will suspend the removal of all Zimbabwean asylum seekers as
a matter of urgency, pending a review of the situation following the murders of
four MDC activists in the last week.
The
Home Office Country Assessment on Zimbabwe prepared in October is already out of
date, but the Adjudicators who decided the cases under threat of deportation
will have relied on the even earlier assessment of April. The situation has
changed so much for the worse since those reports, that neither of them could
have been a reliable basis for decisions affecting the lives of the people
concerned.
The
Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group, which has been very reluctant to
criticise Zimbabwe in the past, said in the communique issued at the end of
their meeting on December 21, that
“the
situation in Zimbabwe constitutes a serious and persistent violation of the
Commonwealth’s fundamental poitical values and the rule of law…”.
President
Muluzi of Malawi, current chairman of SADC, is reported to have summoned an
emergency meeting to consider the deteriorating situation in Zimbabwe from
January 13-15.
The
Ministry of Defence is recalling 10,000 troops from the DRC, to help Mugabe win
the elections.
ZANU
PG has declared its intention to bar the MDC from rural areas, and this means
that it will use even greater force than it has already.
As
you know, the Public Order Act and the Access to Information Act give Mugabe
even greater powers to suppress dissent.
Already
people are being arrested and sometimes tortured, as in the case of the MDC
activists who were arrested for the murder of Cain Nkala.
I
hope you will agree that in these circumstances, we should suspend all removals
and deportations to Zimbabwe, as we have for some other countries where there is
no rule of law. At the very least,
will you agree to a temporary suspension until I can put together a more
detailed argument, by the end of next week.
The
Lord Rooker,
Home
Office,
Queen
Anne’s Gate,
London
SW1H 9AT
From Lord Avebury to Immigration Minister Lord Rooker (2)
December 31, 2001
Further
to our correspondence about
Zimbabwean asylum seekers, I am extremely disappointed that the latest
information I provided with my fax of earlier today was not sufficient to
persuade you that removals to Zimbabwe should be suspended. However, I
understand from Shirley Williams that your Private Secretary did agree that if
we submitted a list of the Zimbabweans under threat of removal you would
consider them. Obviously we will do our best to provide you with such a list,
though you will understand that they are constantly changing. The ones I know
about at the moment are as follows:
Name
HO Ref
Port Ref
Removal
(There
follows a detailed list of names and references)
The
urgent one is Mr Madziwanyika,
due to be removed this evening BA2053 at 21.15.
But
the whole point of the request we made is that we shouldn’t have to submit
individual representations at the 11th hour, but that all these cases
should be properly reviewed in the light of the drastically changed
circumstances in Zimbabwe. You tell me that you are constantly monitoring
developments in Zimbabwe in consultation with the FCO, but there was no answer
from Valerie Amos’s office today, and the Head of Equatorial Africa was on
answerphone. I beg leave to doubt whether you have had advice from the FCO in
the last week, during which there have been quite a few material developments,
as outlined in my last two faxes.
I
know that Shirley Williams and Simon Hughes have both asked you to suspend
removals to Zimbabwe, so I hope you will reconsider your decision, at least
until we can jointly put together a more comprehensive submission by the end of
next week.
I
understand that a “war veteran” is about to be deported, but not on the BA
flight. He arrived at Tinsley House yesterday, and while there he was recognised
as such, though I cannot tell you his name. Clearly we are not asking for his
removal to be deferred.
The Lord Rooker,
Home
Office
Queen
Anne's Gate
London
SW1H 9AT
cc
The Rt Hon the Baroness Williams of Crosby
cc
Simon Hughes Esq MP
cc
Ms Sarah Harland, Zimbabwe Association
From Lord Avebury to Immigration Minister Lord Rooker (3)
January
1, 2002
Further
to my letters about (inter alia) the case of Mr Edwin Madziwanyika, HO ref M
1127934, following your refusal of my last minute representations yesterday, he
was not removed on the 21.15 BA flight because of some technicality, but was due
to be sent back this evening at 18.00.
Sarah
Harland of the Zimbabwe Association pointed out to Manchester Immigration that
Mr Madziwanyika lives in Highfield, one of the two suburbs of Harare that were
attacked by Zanu PF thugs, according to an article in yesterday’s Daily News,
Zanu PF Militias descend on Glen Norah, Highfield.
She
also told the Immigration that an alleged CIO man – Mr Patrick Ganhiwa - was
identified by one of the Tinsley House inmates. When Mr Ganhiwa was confronted,
he was apparently very shocked, but would not say whether he was CIO. While in
someone's room Mr Ganhiwa pulled out a tissue from his pocket and inadvertently
dropped some newspaper cuttings which he speedily and furtively replaced in his
pocket. (A newspaper went missing at Tinsley House, a couple of days ago. This
is not a regular occurrence as newspapers are treated like gold dust and with
great respect. The newspaper in question just happened to be The Observer of
December 30 with an article on asylum seekers being returned to Zimbabwe.
Ms
Harland said that Mr Edwin Madziwanyika should not be sent back on the same
flight as Mr Ganhiwa, but the officer to whom she spoke was more concerned with
the confidentiality of Mr Ganhiwa’s case than with Mr Madziwanyika’s safety.
The officer did make a call to Gatwick and rang Ms Harland back to say that they
were satisfied that Mr Ganhiwa was ‘an ordinary immigration case’. Clearly,
if he is CIO, he was not going to immediately own up on a casual inquiry just
before he was due to be removed, so I think the officer was easily satisfied.
You were not prepared to suspend Mr Madziwanyika’s removal yesterday, so that the latest information including the Zanu-PF attack on his home suburb, could be reassessed. Nor would you agree to our more general request, that you reassess all the deportation cases in the light of information about the deteriorating situation in Zimbabwe, which was not available to the Adjudicators who dealt with their appeals. I think this is an error of judgement, and I will seek to raise it in the House when we reassemble.
The Lord Rooker,
Home
Office
Queen
Anne's Gate
London
SW1H 9AT
cc
The Rt Hon the Baroness Williams of Crosby
cc
Simon Hughes Esq MP
cc
Ms Sarah Harland, Zimbabwe Association
From Immigration Minister Lord Rooker to Lord Avebury
"I do
not accept the situation in Zimbabwe is so serious that it requires the
suspension of removals."
January
3, 2001
Thank you for your letters of 31st December and 1st January about the removal of refused asylum seekers to Zimbabwe.
I would like to deal first with the case of Gerald Mutekiwa, reported in the Observer on 30th December and repeated in the Guardian on 2nd January. This was raised by one of my parliamentary colleagues in early December and I enclose a copy of my reply. The Independent Adjudicator who heard the evidence at Mr Mutakiwa's appeal against refusal of asylum found his story to be a fabrication and I do not think that any reliance should be placed on the unsubstantiated allegations of ill-treatment following his removal to Zimbabwe on 17 December.
As to the general points you raised, I made clear in my letter 31st December I do not accept the situation in Zimbabwe is so serious that it requires the suspension of removals. The country information on Zimbabwe is kept up to date in close liason with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
While the level of violence and rhetoric deployed against the opposition MDC is increasingly vicious, this should come as no surprise to anyone who has followed the press reports of the past year. This is reflected in the IND country assessments for April and October 2001. Each asylum claim is considered individually in the light of its own facts, but we have recognized for some time that genuine MDC activists may well merit a grant of asylum where it is established that they are at particular risk in their location over and above the varying levels of intimidation directed against those opposed to the Zimbabwean Government generally. Cases in which asylum is refused are usually those where the applicant's claim to be an opposition activist has little credibility.
Decisions on asylum claims are subject to the scrutiny of the appellate authorities and, ultimately, of the Courts, and I am not persuaded that the situation in Zimbabwe warrants the suspension of removal of those whose asylum claims have been rejected and their appeals dismissed. We will always, of course, reconsider individual cases in the light of further representations, but I am not prepared to undertake reviews of cases that you have listed simply on the basis that they are liable to removal.
Of the individuals that you have mentioned in your letters, two were removed on 1 January, Edwin Madziwanyka and Naedzai Zemura. The remaining cases are liable to removal subject to any further representations or action in the Courts.
I am sending copies of this letter to Simon Hughes and Baroness Williams
David Robson
pp Jeff Rooker
Approved by the Minister and signed in his absence