Critical Appraisal: Policy Document, Essay Example

Introduction

The U.K. Borders Act 2007 introduced provisions for foreign criminals’ deportation. For example, a deportation order must be issued by the Home Secretary to enable the immigration agency to deport foreign criminals. An exception when a deportation order will not be used to deport foreign criminals is when there will be a contradiction of the U.K. obligations contained in the Refugee and Human Rights Conventions. Under the U.K. Borders Act 2007, the Home Secretary’s statutory power is the deportation of illegal immigrants. Foreigners are liable to deportations as they are non-British citizens whose residence in the U.K. might not be conducive for the public good. However, foreigners’ deportation by the immigration agency is restricted under the European Union (E.U.) law. The restriction ensures that foreigners’ expulsion from the U.K. is proportionate and conducted based on individuals’ conduct. Drawing on the immigration theory, this essay discusses the introduction of the U.K. Borders Act 2007, its implications, strengths, and weaknesses. Foreign nationals are non-UK passport holders whose unlawful actions lead to their deportation by the immigration agency but can challenge extradition orders in tribunals and courts.

Critical Appraisal of the Policy

The U.K. Borders Act 2007 has reduced the number of immigrants through the deportation of foreign national offenders. The foreign national population in the U.K. expanded due to the E.U. law that allows their movement into the region. Banks (2011, p.3) indicates, “Ministry of Justice statistics show that in 2009 foreign nationals comprised 13.7 per cent of the total prison population in England and Wales.” As per 2009, Banks (2011) indicates that 11350 foreign nationals were confined in the U.K. prisons. Concern about wrongdoing and immigration are the contributing factors for the arrest and detention of foreigners by immigration authorities. According to Banks (2011), myths centred on immigration have increased public concern about immigrants’ societal practices. Newspapers and media outlets have propagated an alarmist discourse about social ills executed by foreign nationals. The social ills include delinquency and terrorism, which have created a moral panic among U.K. citizens (Banks, 2011). Law-breaking has led to fear and worries about the increased foreign population in the U.K. The United Kingdom Independence Party and National Front are political parties supporting foreign nationals’ deportation. The deportation is also supported by conservative and labour parties that consider immigrants dangerous and deviant (Banks, 2011).

The population of foreign national offenders detained in the U.K. prisons has increased due to increased surveillance of foreigners. “There are 18,400 foreign national offenders (FNOs) in the U.K., including 9,000 in prisons (who made up 11% of a total prison population in 2019 of 82,200” (Green, n.d., p.1). Under the U.K. Borders Act 2007, refugees lose their right to stay in the U.K. when convicted of crimes and imprisoned for two years. In 2020, the number of foreign national offenders held in the U.K. prisons was 4700. The population in the prisons in 2020 decreased compared to the number of foreign nationals detained in 2019. The decreased population is due to the temporal detaining of foreign national offenders awaiting deportation. U.K.’s deportation rules changed due to Brexit. For example, offenders detained in prison are deported after release, and the elapse of 139 days (Green, n.d.). The deportation due to the risk of reoffending has led to the decreased prison population of foreign national offenders. In the U.K. prisons, detained foreign nationals are discriminated against and victimized. According to Bhatia (2020, p.42), “Participants from Iran, Afghanistan, Sudan, Congo, and Nigeria mentioned that prison staff had preconceived notions about their nationalities, which on most occasions resulted in verbal abuse and degrading treatment.” Foreign nationals are detained due to drug charges, sexual violence, burglary, and other crimes. Although they are detained awaiting deportation, foreigners’ rights are violated in prisons. Bhatia (2020) indicates that correctional officers are stereotyping’s propagators among detained individuals in prisons. The miserable situations undergone by foreigners in prisons lead to the loss of trust, loneliness, anger, and loss. Bhatia (2020) indicates that homophobic bullying is common in prisons. For example, Iranian and Afghanistan foreigners detained in the U.K. prisons are bullied due to their norms. Foreigners suffer mental distress while in detention before they are deported (Bhatia, 2020).

Foreigners’ resettlement needs in the U.K. are in doubt as they are complex than British nationals’ requirements. According to Bhui (2004, p.36), “Implementation of the policy is undeniably patchy, even in London where foreign nationals account for 20% of the general population.” Foreigners in various communities in the U.K. are monitored through local policies. However, increased monitoring discourages knowledge acquisition and the development of good practices. Bhui (2004) indicates that monitoring is tolerable under the U.K. immigration policies due to foreign nationals’ distinct needs during resettlement. Foreigners face challenges when settling due to limited access to essential services needed for their integration in the U.K. Bhui (2004) promulgates that monitoring is done by authorities due to public concern about safety. Authorities’ responsibility is to enforce the law and ensure public protection (Bhui, 2004). Foreign nationals in the U.K. engaging in suspicious activities are deported after sentence. However, deportations are not done when there are no reliable statistics and probable evidence about wrongdoings (Bhui, 2004).

The U.K. Borders Act 2007 invalidates deportation when there is the risk of torture or inhuman treatment. Before adopting the 2007 immigration policy, the U.K. had introduced legislation in November 2002 to protect women from exploitation and aggression during trafficking (Niki, 2003). The U.K. Borders Act 2007 provides that the Home Secretary should pursue a deportation policy once assurance that foreign nationals are not at the risk of torture or inhuman treatment. Niki (2003) indicates that British sovereignty is promoted by deporting suspected criminals. Sovereignty is also promoted through the observance of foreign nationals’ fundamental rights. Enforcement of the immigration laws by authorities is done under the Home Office Control (Niki, 2003). Immigrants’ rights are promoted during deportation as the U.K. adheres to the Human Rights Framework. Foreign national offenders can appeal for deportation orders to eliminate errors during legal processes (Niki, 2003).

Under the U.K. Borders Act 2007, foreigners subject to deportation must leave the country after detention. U.K. parties advocate for the strict observance of deportation orders once foreign nations engage in deliquescence or crime. Fekete and Webber (2010, p.2) assert that “In response to such stories, politicians have set targets for the removal of foreign national prisoners and the belief has grown that deportation is a reasonable and proportionate way to guarantee public security against a foreign enemy.” Foreign nationals are targeted and deported due to their involvement in immigration crimes. For example, working illegally under false documents is an immigration offence leading to foreign nationals’ deportation. Within prison statistics, foreign nationals include children, immigrant youths, guest workers, and their grandchildren (Fekete and Webber, 2010). Foreigners that drift into a delinquency or vagrancy life are deported as the U.K. government remains committed to resolving crimes. Delinquent foreign nationals are denied citizenship, and their settlement is withdrawn once they are violating the immigration laws (Fekete and Webber, 2010).

In the U.K., foreigners are under surveillance and control to ensure they engage in legal practices. Hasselberg (2014, p.473) indicates that “A foreign national facing deportation from the U.K. may be detained at any point of the process if there is reason to believe he or she will abscond, or if the person, having exhausted all appeal rights, is about to be deported.” Immigrants’ surveillance in the U.K. is done through weekly reporting requirements and electronic monitoring. Hasselberg (2014) indicates that the U.K.’s surveillance strategies are allied to the region’s deportation policies. The immigrants’ surveillance is a legal and administrative procedure under the U.K. Borders Act 2007. Hasselberg (2014) indicates immigration officials are under state surveillance and banishment, making them vulnerable and in need of protection while in the U.K. Ironically, surveillance and punitive effects of detention experienced by foreigners are not imposed through the U.K. judicial processes (Hasselberg, 2014). The author also proclaims that deportation is a process that begins when foreign nationals are discovered to have engaged in illegal activities. Suspected nationals are also targeted and placed under surveillance to control their practices (Hasselberg, 2014). Detention centres enforce the state’s punitive and disciplinary measures before immigrants’ deportation.

The U.K.’s punitive stance towards criminal activities has led to foreigner’s detention and expulsion. According to Turnbull and Hasselberg (2017, p.140), “In 2012, 22% of foreign national offenders were detained for between three to six months, 21% for between six to twelve months, and 16% were detained for 12 months and longer.” The U.K. reforms in the past decade led to the automatic expulsion of foreign nationals convicted of a crime. Under the U.K. Borders Act 2007, imprisonment is the initial stage of a complex process undergone by foreign nationals once they are suspected criminals. Turnbull and Hasselberg (2017) indicate that criminal convictions’ consequences to non-citizen residents in the U.K. are life-shuttering. For instance, foreign nationals are confined in prisons due to law-breaking. Crime control measures and state efforts have led to foreigners’ deportation to combat crime in the U.K. Turnbull and Hasselberg (2017) upholds that hostility to foreign nationals in the U.K. is due to their widespread conviction of crimes. British nationals have shown aggression towards foreign nationals as their involvement in wrongdoing is undeserving of sympathy.

E.U. countries have experienced a rise in prison population due to the detention of foreign nationals. Immigrants undergo judicial processes, and in case of an unsuccessful appeal, they are detained, awaiting deportation. Wacquant (1999, p.218) maintains that “More generally, it is well documented that those judicial practices that are seemingly the most neutral and the most routine, beginning with preventative (remand) detention.” Public perceptions in the U.K. indicate distaste in foreigners engaged in crime. Wacquant (1999) asserts that second-generation immigrants are subject to discrimination and suffering due to their lower-class distribution. For example, blacks are discriminated against due to racial disproportionality (Wacquant, 1999). The problem of inferior class composition has also been expressed in detention centres. For instance, foreign nationals held in prisons and jails are segregated based on their ethnonational origin. Wacquant (1999) indicates that judicial processes deemed neutral and routine tend to disadvantage foreign nationals. Immigrants are arrested, prosecuted, and incarcerated in detention centres before they are deported. Security and immigrants’ association with crime has led to administrative regulation and scrutiny (Wacquant, 1999).

The establishment of immigration prisons in the U.K. has facilitated the temporal imprisonment of foreign nationals awaiting deportation. According to (Warr, 2016, p.2), “At the end of March 2015, there were 10,481 foreign nationals (defined as non-UK passport holders) held in prisons in England and Wales, representing 12 per cent of the overall prison population.” The shift in the public and political attitudes about immigrants facilitated the deportation of foreign nationals engaging in criminal activities. Warr (2016) propounds that undocumented workers, trafficked persons, and designated non-citizens are the immigrants held in immigration prisons awaiting deportation by the immigration officials. However, the immigrants are hidden from the criminological inquiry because they are subjected to unethical discourses. In England and Wales, the immigrants’ imprisonment gained ground in the 1990s, and the practice was still conducted in the early 2000s. The adoption of the U.K. Borders Act 2007, immigrants’ legal status was defined, leading to the entrenchment of the imprisonment practice (Warr, 2016).

The implication of the Policy

Legal implications result when there is a breach of the U.K. Borders Act 2007. If foreigners are discovered that they engaged in illegal activities, the legal implication is negative. The implication is deemed negative as it works against foreigners’ continuous existence in the U.K. The U.K. Borders Act 2007 is a regulation handed down to British citizens and foreign nationals. A breach of the U.K. Borders Act 2007 leads to punishments or sanctions. A negative implication of the breach of the immigration rules is foreigner’s deportation. The Home Secretary designates immigration officers to revoke foreigners’ permits to work in the U.K. once they are involved in illegal activities. Under the U.K. Borders Act 2007, immigration officers are mandated to detain liable individuals. Arrests made by immigration officers in England are under Section 24 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. Offenders are subject to arrest warrants and are liable to be detained by immigration officers before they are subjected to criminal procedures. Deportation is an implication of the breach of immigration policies by foreigners (Turnbull and Hasselberg, 2017).

Despite the negative implications of the U.K. Borders Act 2007, the legislation protects individuals’ rights and freedoms. For instance, foreign nationals’ rights are upheld before they are deported once the Home Secretary has issued a deportation order. Observance of the U.K. Borders Act 2007 protects foreigners’ liberties in the U.K. Foreign nationals are also protected as the U.K. Borders Act 2007 regulates their interactions with the state. The legislation provides that foreign nationals are deported for specific offences or are imprisoned for more than a year. The U.K. Borders Act 2007 strengthened the immigration system to enable officers to secure the borders and prevent illegal working. Immigrants such as asylum and work applicants are regulated under the U.K. Borders Act 2007. The U.K. government has protected its citizens against criminal activities committed by foreigners (Warr, 2016). Thereby, deportation is a favourable legal implication due to the banishment of foreign criminals.

Strengths of the Policy

The U.K. Borders Act 2007’s strength is that the policy has led to increased surveillance of foreigners to prevent their involvement in a crime. Bhui (2004) indicates that surveillance is permitted under the U.K. immigration policies. The U.K. administrators such as immigration officers and police use surveillance technologies to target foreigners and gain intelligent information. The administrators have secured the U.K.’s borders and improved immigration control by ensuring that immigrants adhere to immigration policies to avoid consequences. Consequences such as detention and deportation arise when there is a breach of the U.K. Borders Act 2007. The legislation provides guidelines for domestic surveillance to ensure that foreigners’ practices in the U.K. are monitored. For instance, foreign nationals are under immigration control and are required to provide their biometric information once an order is issued by the Home Secretary. Photographs and fingerprints are foreigners’ biometric information collected by immigration officers. Foreigners in the U.K. can engage in public services and the labour market as long as there is strict adherence to the immigration policies (Bhui, 2004).

Another strength of the U.K. Borders Act 2007 is that the policy draws from the Human Rights Framework to ensure that foreign nationals are protected before being deported. According to Banks (2011), the E.U. law limits the Home Secretary’s powers to improve immigration control. The U.K. Borders Act 2007 established legal regimes for British nationals and foreigners. Immigration officers are mandated under the legislation to conduct foreign surveillance to protect British nationals against harm. The Borders Act 2007 has prevented identity abuse by providing that immigration officer secure permission from the Home Secretary before detaining and deporting foreign nationals. Foreign nationals are required to abide by orders issued to immigration officers by the Home Secretary. For example, foreigners are required to provide evidence about their immigration status and comply with their staying conditions in the U.K. Banks (2011) indicates that it is an illegal requirement for immigrants to adhere to practice codes while staying in the U.K. Thereby, the authorities’ adherence to the U.K. Borders Act 2007 enables immigrants to pursue their freedoms in the U.K.

Weaknesses of the Policy

A shortcoming of the U.K. Borders Act 2007 is that the legislation has failed to curb illegal immigration and to work in the U.K. For instance, there were 10481 non-UK passport holders in 2015 (Warr, 2016). The foreign national illegally operating in the U.K. had moved into the country despite surveillance by the immigration system that protects borders. The increasing phenomenon of illegal immigration necessitated the immigration authorities to set up immigration removal centres in England and Wales. However, illegal immigrants in the U.K. are not held in the immigration removal centres as they are detained in prisons. Detaining foreign nationals without U.K. passports in the prisons is a breach of the U.K. Borders Act 2007. Based on the legislation, immigrants unable to submit requested documents are detained by immigration authorities until their identity is established and proved. The U.K. Borders Act 2007 does not provide for the detention of illegal immigrants in prisons. Non-citizens undergo suffering and discrimination when they are detained in prisons (2016).

Another limitation of the U.K. Borders Act 2007 is that the legislation provided immigration officers with new powers which have been abused. Immigration officers impose sanctions without assessing the penalties set by the Home Secretary to be issued at particular levels (Niki, 2003). When immigration officers fail to comply with the Home Secretary’s instructions, there is a breach of the immigration legislation. As per the U.K. Borders Act 2007, the immigration officer’s role is to inform the Home Secretary that information provided by immigrants is false or misleading. However, immigration officers have breached the U.K. Borders Act 2007 to victimize immigrants whose information about residency in the U.K. is incomplete. The courts have also failed to render justice to foreign nationals oppressed by immigration officers. Instead, the E.U. Courts’ verdict is the deportation of foreigners whose documents do not meet the U.K. working regulations. Immigrants are deported as most of their appeals in the E.U. courts are unsuccessful. The U.K. immigration legislation offers minimal support to immigrants as they are deported instead of reapplying for a working visa or citizenship (Niki, 2003).

Conclusion

To sum up, foreigners whose stay in the U.K. is deemed unconducive for the public good are deported by the Home Secretary, who has statutory power under the U.K. Borders Act 2007. Foreign nationals are non-UK passport holders whose unlawful actions lead to their deportation by the immigration agency but can challenge extradition orders in tribunals and courts. Fears and concerns over a rise in the foreign population in the U.K. have been raised due to law-breaking. Foreigners are being watched and monitored by the immigration agency to prevent them from committing a crime. Immigration officers collect foreigner’s information to monitor their practices in the U.K. Because of the unique needs of foreign nationals, monitoring is permissible under U.K. immigration policies. Immigration officers collect foreigners’ biometric details such as photographs and fingerprints. Despite increased surveillance of foreigners, limitations in the U.K. Borders Act 2007 have made it difficult for courts to provide justice in cases involving illegal immigration. Immigrants are shielded from the criminological investigation as immigration officials subject to immoral practises. Therefore, the Home Secretary’s statutory power is limited under the E.U. law to create a balance between appellants’ rights and the wider community’s interests.

References List

Banks, J., 2011. Foreign national prisoners in the U.K.: Explanations and implications. The Howard Journal of Criminal Justice, 50(2), pp.184-198.

Bhatia, M., 2020. Crimmigration, imprisonment and racist violence: Narratives of people seeking asylum in Great Britain. Journal of sociology, 56(1), pp.36-52.

Bhui, H.S., 2004. The resettlement needs of foreign national offenders in Criminal Justice Matters 56: 36-7 and 44. Centre for Crime and Justice Studied. Available at: https://www.crimeandjustice.org.uk/sites/crimeandjustice.org.uk/files/09627250408552947.pdf. (Accessed 27.04.2021).

Fekete, L. and Webber, F., 2010. Foreign nationals, enemy penology, and the criminal justice system. Race & Class, 51(4), pp.1-25.

Green, L. A. (n.d.). Foreign national offenders. Migration Watch UK. https://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/484/foreign-national-offenders

Hasselberg, I., 2014. Coerced to leave: Punishment and the surveillance of foreign-national offenders in the U.K. Surveillance & Society, 12(4), pp.471-484.

Niki A., 2003. Anti-trafficking legislation: protection or deportation?. Feminist Review, 73(1), pp.135-139.

Turnbull, S. and Hasselberg, I., 2017. From prison to detention: The carceral trajectories of foreign-national prisoners in the United Kingdom. Punishment & Society, 19(2), pp.135-154.

Wacquant, L., 1999. Suitable enemies’ foreigners and immigrants in the prisons of Europe. Punishment & Society, 1(2), pp.215-222.

Warr, J., 2016. The deprivation of certitude, legitimacy, and hope: Foreign national prisoners and the pains of imprisonment. Criminology & Criminal Justice, 16(3), pp.301-318.