Source · Select Committees · Women and Equalities Committee
Recommendation 5
5
Rejected
Paragraph: 62
Publish findings of 2019-20 review and steps to improve SOGI asylum decision-making.
Recommendation
The Home Office should demonstrate it is taking effective steps to mitigate the risk of unequal effects in the asylum process. There is a range of distinct difficulties faced by people claiming asylum on grounds of sexual orientation or gender-identity. These claims are difficult to evidence, legally complex and difficult to determine accurately. They are not determined consistently well, leading to expensive appeals and overturned decisions. We were disappointed that the Minister was unable to set out in any detail the steps the Department has taken since the internal review it conducted in 2019–20 to improve the accuracy of its initial decision-making in such cases. In response to this Report the Home Office should set out the main findings of the 2019–20 review and the steps it has taken to improve decision-making in cases involving sexual orientation and gender identity-based claims.
Government Response Summary
The government explicitly rejects publishing the main findings of its 2019–20 internal review. It states that it learns from errors through improved guidance, training, and an established quality audit process, including specialist checks for decision-makers handling sexual identity or FGM claims.
Paragraph Reference:
62
Government Response
Rejected
HM Government
Rejected
In relation to the recommendation at paragraph 62, we will not be publishing the main findings of the internal review. Most of our decisions are well reasoned and properly consider evidence provided by the claimant against country information available. Where we get decisions wrong, we learn from this by addressing issues through improved guidance, training and our established quality audit process. Our processes are underpinned by a robust framework of safeguards and quality checks, ensuring that claims are properly considered, decisions are sound, and that protection is granted to those who genuinely need it. We are committed to sampling 3.5% of all asylum decisions completed by decision makers. We sample all decisions made by new decision makers until they are able to complete sustainable decisions independently. Additional checks are completed for some claim types. If the claim is based on persecution on the grounds of sexual identity or Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), the decision maker’s first three cases, will be checked by a technical specialist. This includes a check of the interview and the decision. If a case is not satisfactory, feedback will be provided, and a further check will be completed until the required standards are met. If the three cases meet the required standard, the decision maker does not need to submit further cases for checking but will be subjected to future checks as part of our routine quality sampling procedure. Those completing the quality assessments must adhere to the Home Office interview and decision marking standards. These marking standards can be shared with Decision Makers to improve understanding on quality standard scorings when receiving feedback.