THE UK Home Office has ignored for the second time a call from the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) to respond to The National’s request for it to review its refusal to answer a freedom of information (FOI) request.
In a case that has been dragging on since March, we wanted to know how many asylum seekers had been deported from the UK after removal orders were issued through “human error”, as happened in Isabella Katjiparatijivi’s case.
READ MORE: Asylum seeker overcomes key hurdle in fight to stay in Scotland
The Namibian had been wrongly held at Dungavel awaiting removal, despite the Home Office claiming that no removal instruction had been issued. It later confirmed that the order had been issued and blamed “human error”.
The issue had far-reaching implications and Immigration Minister Caroline Nokes, told the SNP’s Chris Stevens, Katjiparatijivi’s MP, that an internal review had been launched after the error came to light.
She said: “Revised guidance and training is being provided to all officers who authorise the serving of removal directions”.
Our original FOI request was refused when the Home Office said it would cost more than the £600 cost limit.
However we disputed its claim that its systems “cannot identify cases where there has been alleged ‘human error’”, and asked for an internal review.
When we received no response, we contacted the ICO, which wrote to the Home Office giving officials 10 days to respond, adding: “Internal reviews are referred to in the section 45 Code of Practice, and significant or repeated unreasonable delays in dealing with internal reviews will be monitored by the enforcement team. In some instances regulatory action may be necessary.”
That was in the middle of June, but by the beginning of this month we had still heard nothing from the Home Office.
We wrote to the ICO yesterday, and await with interest whether or not enforcement action will be taken against the Home Office.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel