Opinion / Columnist
UK sets new Zimbabwe country guidance case
16 Jun 2011 at 06:30hrs | Views
THE United Kingdom Upper Tribunal has at last announced the new Country Guidance case on Zimbabwe. It is called EM & Ors: Zimbabwe CG [2011] UKUT 00098.
The new Country Guidance case has significantly narrowed the risk categories that were available under the previous Country Guidance case.
Here is a brief summary:
* As a general matter, there is now significantly less politically motivated violence in Zimbabwe, compared with the situation considered by the AIT in RN. In particular, failed asylum seekers from the United Kingdom who have no significant MDC profile will not be at risk of having to demonstrate loyalty to the Zanu PF.
* In general, anyone from the rural areas from the eastern provinces who cannot demonstrate loyalty to Zanu-PF is at real risk of persecution. RN has therefore been preserved for this narrow group, the obvious link here being the Marange diamond fields.
* People in Harare (or other urban areas outside Matabeleland) are at risk if they have a significant MDC profile or will take part in political activities likely to attract the attention of Zanu PF. The risks they face include those arising from the recent Zanu PF attacks on the MDC in Harare that the Tribunal recorded. They are unlikely to have an internal relocation alternative to rural areas except Matabeleland.
* While Matabeleland may generally offer a safe haven, this will not be the case for Shonas who may face discrimination in those areas.
* The Country Guidance as to risk on arrival remains unchanged.
* People from the rural areas, while generally at risk if they cannot demonstrate loyalty to the Mugabe regime, will be expected to relocate to the urban areas, unless it can be shown that this would be unduly harsh, especially because of the general economic hardships.
* Teachers continue to be a heightened risk category.
* The Tribunal emphasised that their guidance may need to be departed from if conditions deteriorated in connection with the forthcoming elections. In this scenario of an early election, the Tribunal found that "…there is a real risk of violence on the scale of 2008…Roadblocks would proliferate in many rural areas, militia bases and so-called torture bases would be activated in such areas and "loyalty tests" – this time, of course, involving Mugabe and Zanu PF rather than the government as such – would again become commonplace".
* The Tribunal also confirmed that "if after promulgation of this determination, evidence emerges that elections will be held at a particular time, without any of the safeguards and other countervailing features we have described, then the structures underpinning the country guidance system ensure that judicial fact-finders will be required to have regard to the new state of affairs, in reaching determinations on Zimbabwe cases".
* The real silver lining in the new Country Guidance case is that it confirms that most failed asylum seekers will by now have established family lives in the UK and even where neither the children nor any parent has the status of a British citizen, the welfare of their children is a primary consideration. It concluded that seven years in the UK was an appropriate threshold in determining whether to allow the Article 8 appeals of families with children. The 7 year concession is therefore effectively back by stealth.
Anyone who thinks that their immigration status may be affected by this opinion should seek professional legal advice.
------------------------
Taffi Nyawanza is the principal of Genesis Law Associates, a specialist immigration and asylum law firm in Birmingham. He can be contacted on tnyawanza@genesislaw.co.uk or ph. 0121 222 2370 or visit Genesis Law Associates' website at www.genesislaw.co.uk
The new Country Guidance case has significantly narrowed the risk categories that were available under the previous Country Guidance case.
Here is a brief summary:
* As a general matter, there is now significantly less politically motivated violence in Zimbabwe, compared with the situation considered by the AIT in RN. In particular, failed asylum seekers from the United Kingdom who have no significant MDC profile will not be at risk of having to demonstrate loyalty to the Zanu PF.
* In general, anyone from the rural areas from the eastern provinces who cannot demonstrate loyalty to Zanu-PF is at real risk of persecution. RN has therefore been preserved for this narrow group, the obvious link here being the Marange diamond fields.
* People in Harare (or other urban areas outside Matabeleland) are at risk if they have a significant MDC profile or will take part in political activities likely to attract the attention of Zanu PF. The risks they face include those arising from the recent Zanu PF attacks on the MDC in Harare that the Tribunal recorded. They are unlikely to have an internal relocation alternative to rural areas except Matabeleland.
* While Matabeleland may generally offer a safe haven, this will not be the case for Shonas who may face discrimination in those areas.
* The Country Guidance as to risk on arrival remains unchanged.
* People from the rural areas, while generally at risk if they cannot demonstrate loyalty to the Mugabe regime, will be expected to relocate to the urban areas, unless it can be shown that this would be unduly harsh, especially because of the general economic hardships.
* Teachers continue to be a heightened risk category.
* The Tribunal emphasised that their guidance may need to be departed from if conditions deteriorated in connection with the forthcoming elections. In this scenario of an early election, the Tribunal found that "…there is a real risk of violence on the scale of 2008…Roadblocks would proliferate in many rural areas, militia bases and so-called torture bases would be activated in such areas and "loyalty tests" – this time, of course, involving Mugabe and Zanu PF rather than the government as such – would again become commonplace".
* The Tribunal also confirmed that "if after promulgation of this determination, evidence emerges that elections will be held at a particular time, without any of the safeguards and other countervailing features we have described, then the structures underpinning the country guidance system ensure that judicial fact-finders will be required to have regard to the new state of affairs, in reaching determinations on Zimbabwe cases".
* The real silver lining in the new Country Guidance case is that it confirms that most failed asylum seekers will by now have established family lives in the UK and even where neither the children nor any parent has the status of a British citizen, the welfare of their children is a primary consideration. It concluded that seven years in the UK was an appropriate threshold in determining whether to allow the Article 8 appeals of families with children. The 7 year concession is therefore effectively back by stealth.
Anyone who thinks that their immigration status may be affected by this opinion should seek professional legal advice.
------------------------
Taffi Nyawanza is the principal of Genesis Law Associates, a specialist immigration and asylum law firm in Birmingham. He can be contacted on tnyawanza@genesislaw.co.uk or ph. 0121 222 2370 or visit Genesis Law Associates' website at www.genesislaw.co.uk
Source - genesislaw
All articles and letters published on Bulawayo24 have been independently written by members of Bulawayo24's community. The views of users published on Bulawayo24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Bulawayo24. Bulawayo24 editors also reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.
