Though not accused of a crime, 30,000 immigrants each year are detained indefinitely. The need for an effective complaints process in immigration removal centres (IRCs) is clear ; there have been documented cases of ‘inhuman and degrading treatment’ and sexual abuse by staff.  Medical mistreatment is rife, neglect has contributed to detainee deaths.

Many of us assume that at the very least, our civilised society affords a fair complaints process to detainees facing removal back to the country they fled, including victims of torture, trafficking, rape, and political persecution. Yet our report reveals a questionable high rate of complaints being dismissed on the back of biased investigations.”

Complaints included withholding HIV medication, blood tests, and pregnancy scans; and handcuffing during medical appointments.  All complaints of assault we have seen have been dismissed despite many having compelling medical evidence including photos and medical records. A stroke victim’s complaint that many hospital appointments were inexplicably cancelled was not upheld despite the cancellations being documented in his medical records.  A complaint of sexual abuse was not upheld even though a staff member was dismissed and a compensation payment made to the victim.

Many detainees, including key witnesses to the event, are removed before the complaint has been investigated.  In cases of serious misconduct, there will always be the suspicion of deliberate attempts to impede a proper investigation. If a detainee is injured during removal and the removal goes ahead, there is apparently no requirement for the incident to be reported.

Many detainees do not make complaints out of fear of retribution. When they do, they often face an inequitable process. Some detainees have been left unable to challenge the dismissal of their complaint because the Home Office cites evidence - photos, CCTV, witness statements, etc - that it does not automatically disclose.

Alarmingly low levels of substantiated complaints raise serious concerns about the impartiality of the investigations. One immigration removal centre’s substantiation rate was 2.5%, in contrast to the Prison & Health Service Ombudsman’s rate of 80%.

The Home Office closed down the Complaints Audit Committee after it found that 83% of complaint investigations were inadequate. Subsequently there has been no systematic overview of complaints to identify trends or to ensure lessons are learnt. This is of great concern, not least because the Home Office detains more people each year and fewer detainees have legal representation.

Medical Justice believes that the harm caused by immigration removal centres is so widespread that the only solution is to close them down, especially so if the complaints process continues to be wholly ineffectual.  In the interim we offer a number of practical recommendations for change in this report.

Download the report here