Public Law Solicitors

Cyprus has always been the place to visit to soak up the sun and is described as many travel agents as “the home of the all-inclusive”. Sadly, this is not the reception that refugees are greeted with on arrival in Cyprus, during their time in Cyprus or even once they have been granted international protection.

In a recent article by the Cyprus Mail it was quoted that “some 87 percent of refugees in Cyprus said they would leave if they could as they saw no way of improving their lives on the island” .

A number of articles and reports from non-governmental organisations document that migrants are suffering great hardship and social exclusion and are living well below the poverty line. Citizens of the country are guaranteed shelter and welfare but the migrant is left alone without any resources. The poverty of migrants is due to a lack of government funding available for their needs and legal entitlements and the lack of proper administration to reach them. Sadly, the migrants are at the bottom of all lists.

Cyprus states that it is not currently returning Syrians back to their country of origin but nonetheless these Syrians have been left to live in conditions unfit for animals. In January 2015, a camp in Kokkinotrimithia, where Syrian refugees resided was closed down and the Ministry of Interior proceeded with the withdrawal of all state services from the camp. These included the police, civil defence, medical services and cooks. Concurrently, the humanitarian aid and services given especially by the Cypriot Red Cross have been interrupted and have withdrawn their services too. According to an article by KISA (a Cyprus based non-governmental organisation), dated 21 January 2015 “the indispensible presence of the Red Cross for humanitarian aid has stopped following a request and suggestion of the Ministry of Interior”. At the date of this article the refugees remained at the camp with the absence of civil presence and without access to medical care.

It is true to say that the government, along with the UNHCR, urged these Syrians and Palestinians to apply for asylum as a best guarantee to ensure their international protection needs. Even though they lack legal residence status because they did not apply for asylum, we argue that refugees have a basic right to live in decent conditions and have access to health care and education for children.

With its decision the Cypriot government left these helpless Syrians with two choices in that they could either i) Stay in the camp under the current hard living conditions or ii) obligate them to apply for asylum, although the fact that the republic of Cyprus violates refugee law by not providing recognised refugee status.

Here at Duncan Lewis we are running a number of challenges to stop our clients being removed to Cyprus; for returning them would result in a breach of their basic human rights. We represent a number of individuals in these challenges and they include a Syrian individual who was refouled to Syria by the Cypriot authorities in 2012individuals suffering from mental health issues who will not receive the care they should on return to Cyprus. Solicitor, Shalini Patel currently has conduct of the test case in relation to returns to Cyprus.

Solicitor, Rohena Wallace and Trainee Solicitor, Hannah Baynes recently undertook a fact-finding mission to Cyprus and obtained statements from a number of non-governmental organisations, all of which expressed their concerns in relation to asylum-seekers being returned from the United Kingdom to Cyprus. UNHCR stated during a meeting that there continues to be a breach of Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights (“ECHR”) and no steps have been taken by the Cypriot authorities to ensure that the asylum procedures in Cyprus are compatible with Article 2, 3, 5 and 13 of the ECHR and cognate rights in EU Charter.

In the recent case of MA v Cyprus (application no. 41872/10) before the European Court of Human Rights, the Court found that Cyprus had breached the ECHR in its failure to provide an effective remedy under Article 13. It seems that nothing has changed for asylum seekers since the case of MA and there still remains a risk that a number of articles will be breached. Since this decision, there have been no changes in the remedies available for challenging deportation and detention. Moreover; it was confirmed by the lawyer who brought this challenge that there have been continuous breaches of Article 5 against immigration detainees. She has encountered individuals being detained for more than 12 months and others up to 18 months, without any prospect of deportation, although the law states that immigration detainees should not, as a rule be detained for longer than 6 months, and only under specific conditions, for an additional 12 months. In numerous cases, migrants are detained without being informed of their rights at the outset of detention. Additionally, they are not informed of the legal reasons for their detention, and no detention reviews are carried out, in accordance with the law.

The test case is due to be heard this summer and is to be linked to a number of other matters. We truly hope that we can assist those asylum seekers that arrived in the United Kingdom hoping to be treated with the respect and dignity they deserve, after all, this is the reason why they left their homes, fleeing from persecution. Shalini Patel, the author of this article, currently works as a solicitor within the Public Law Department.

About the Author: Shalini Patel

Shalini is a Solicitor within the Public Law and Immigration. Shalini has worked with Duncan Lewis Solicitors since November 2011 and has expanded on her legal knowledge in Immigration, Public Law, Childcare and Family Law during her training. Shalini completed her LPC at BPP Law School , London , whilst working part-time with the Treasury Solicitors Department as an Executive Officer where she gained extensive experience in Immigration Judicial Review work. Shalini's insight into the Treasury Solicitors manner of working makes her a great asset to the Public Law Department. S

Shalini is qualified under the Law Society Immigration and Asylum Accreditation Scheme as a Level 2 Immigration caseworker. Shalini is currently challenging removals to Hungary which our firm has not taken on many of and may become a lead case in the near future. Shalini is fluent in Hindi and Gujarati.