Charter Flight

It was inhumane to persist in removing people under the Dublin Convention whose vulnerability was patent, as illustrated in this report. In his letter of 25 November 2020, referred to in paragraph 2.1.5, the minister wrote that: ‘detention and removal are essential parts of immigration controls. It is vital that these are carried out with dignity and respect and we take the welfare of the individual in our care very seriously’. The CFMT considers that persisting with these removals was at odds with these standards. Her Majesty’s Government has an opportunity to reassert them in practical ways in any new agreements with countries deemed “safe” which are intended to replicate other aspects of the Dublin Convention.”

If the reality of any such new agreements is that removal from the UK to the ‘safe’ country will be enforced removal, they must contain an express commitment to brief the receiving country on the needs of the returnee – a proper, structured handover of the sort not achieved in 2020, as evidenced in the report.

In its annual reports for each of 2018 and 2019, the CFMT recommended that use of airports distant from IRCs in the South East be discontinued. This recommendation was rejected both times. It is repeated here. The travelling time to distant airports was a significant contributor to the total period of confinement in vehicles, as evidenced in this report. The welfare of returnees subjected to these journeys did not appear to the CFMT to be a primary consideration.

Video coverage of escorts collecting a returnee at the IRC can be inadequate if only one body-worn camera is used. This approach must be reviewed, as must the approach to filming incidents which happen on the plane before take-off or while it is in the air (see paragraphs 3.8.1 and 3.8.6, third bullet).

There must be no continued use of areas in an IRC from which people are collected for charters which expose them, or the escorts or any officials or observers present, to an environment which is unsafe under COVID-19 conditions (see paragraph 3.9.4).

Use of IRC staff dressed in riot gear when they present a returnee for transfer to escorts’ custody must be kept under constant review (see section 3.7).

If enforced charter removal to a ‘safe’ country is resumed under, for example, new agreements envisaged in paragraphs 2.3.1 and 2.3.2, these returnees must be told in a language they understand what to expect upon arrival in the ‘safe’ country (see paragraphs 6.1.2 – 6.1.4). The Home Office detainee engagement team (DET) in an IRC should have a role here.

The same team in an IRC must: (1) continue to offer the Charter Flight Information booklet and explain its contents to all returnees in advance of charter removal, using interpreting services where necessary (see paragraph 4.3.4) and (2) distribute all published literature on reintegration support offered in Jamaica, Pakistan and West Africa to returnees to these countries in advance of charter removal (see paragraph 6.2.1).

Professional interpreting services must be provided to all returnees who need it, at every stage of the removal process on the day, including on the tarmac at the airport (see paragraph 4.5.2 and section 4.9).

A supply of compression socks must be available on the plane and offered to returnees under the guidance of the paramedics (see paragraph 5.1.1, first bullet).

The person escort record (PER) is intended to be a running log which each escort must maintain for each returnee in his/her care during the removal process. There is a continuing need to demonstrate that information which all returnees are entitled to is given at the right time and recorded in the PER. For example, the offer of access to a lavatory before leaving the IRC, use of the guiding hold, filming, the potential of a pillow or blanket on the plane, the potential of talking to the chief immigration officer (CIO) during the flight (see paragraphs 4.2.2, 4.2.3, 4.6.2, 4.6.3 and 4.6.5).

Continued use of restraint and the reasons for this were rarely noted in the PER, despite the routine instruction to escorts during the staff muster to record (paragraph 3.8.8). This should be standard practice.

Returnees must not be confined in vehicles for hours. The CFMT observed that they were rarely given any hint of the likely timeline. The first and last components of time spent in vehicles (collection and then hanging around at airports) must be better managed, to minimise in-vehicle confinement. The recommendation about coach confinement made in the CFMT’s 2019 annual report was accepted but the CFMT has no evidence of any real change in practice, or knowledge of the outcome of the intended ‘deep dive’ review (see section 4.4).

The escorts must be instructed to explain the contents of the individual information packs to all returnees, with assistance, where needed, from interpreters (see paragraph 4.3.5).