- UNHCR and Elton John criticism
- Home Secretary Suella Braverman’s controversial asylum system views
- Concerns over LGBTQ+ discrimination
The United Nations’ refugee agency and Sir Elton John have criticized the Home Secretary for claiming that the current asylum system is ineffective.
The Home Secretary announced her asylum reform plan days before the Conservative Party conference. During her visit to Washington, DC, Ms. Braverman addressed a US think tank.
In a speech in Washington, DC, Suella Braverman called for a reform of the “outdated” international system.
She described the number of displaced people in the world as an “epoch-defining challenge” and stated that being lesbian or female should not be sufficient grounds for asylum.
Number 10 supported the senior cabinet minister’s call to change the 1951 UN Human Rights Convention, which governs asylum.
In response to Ms. Braverman’s speech, the UN’s refugee agency, UNHCR, stated that the convention “remains as relevant today as it was when it was adopted, providing an indispensable framework for addressing these challenges through international cooperation.”
According to Sir Elton John, Ms. Braverman’s comments risk “further legitimizing hatred and violence” against LGBT+ individuals.
The UN agency added, “There is no need for reform or a more restrictive interpretation; rather, there is a need for a stronger and more consistent application of the convention and its underlying principle of shared responsibility.”
Decision-making procedures should be strengthened and accelerated to address the UK asylum backlog and increased arrivals.
This would speed refugee integration and illegal immigrant return.
UNHCR has presented the UK government with concrete, actionable proposals in this regard and continues to support constructive, ongoing efforts to clear the current asylum backlog.
In a statement released through the Elton John Aids Foundation, the Rocket Man singer and his husband David Furnish said, “We are very concerned about the UK Home Secretary’s comments that discrimination for being gay or a woman should not be sufficient to qualify for refugee status under international law.
“Nearly one-third of the world’s nations consider LGBTQ+ people criminals, and eleven nations still execute homosexuals.”
“Dismissing the very real threat faced by LGBTQ+ communities risks legitimizing bigotry and violence against them.
“Leaders need to provide more compassion, support, and acceptance for those seeking a safer future.”
Ms. Braverman stated that uncontrolled and illegal migration is an “existential challenge for the political and cultural institutions of the West” and that “uncontrolled immigration, inadequate integration, and a misguided dogma of multiculturalism have proven to be a toxic combination for Europe over the last few decades”.
Ms. Braverman wondered if courts have redefined asylum as “discrimination” rather than “persecution” for lesbians and women.
Where individuals are persecuted, it is proper for us to provide sanctuary.
“But we will not be able to sustain an asylum system if, in effect, simply being gay, or a woman, and fearful of discrimination in your country of origin, is sufficient to qualify for protection.”
She said migration “threatens the stability and security of society in extreme cases.”
Her words: “we now live in a completely different time” than when the UNHRC was signed.
She continued, “Does the Refugee Convention require revision?
What would a revised international framework for asylum look like?
“How can we strike a better balance between national rights and human rights. So that the latter do not undermine national sovereignty?”
Many charities, lawmakers, and activists criticised the address.
Ben Bradshaw, a homosexual Labour MP and former cabinet minister, questioned whether “LGBT or any other Tories” were willing to condemn the Home Secretary, stating that “being gay is sufficient to result in persecution or death in many countries.”
Michael Fabricant, a Tory MP and patron of the Conservative LGBT+ group, stated that “claiming homosexuality to gain entry to the United Kingdom should not be sufficient grounds for granting asylum.”
He added, “However, if a person has been persecuted in the country from which they are fleeing. This presents a very distinct and much more convincing case. Each application should be thoroughly evaluated on its own merits.”
Cynicism and xenophobia’ as well.
Sacha Deshmukh, the chief executive of Amnesty International UK, stated, “The Refugee Convention is a cornerstone of international law, and we must expose this attack on the convention for what it is: a display of cynicism and xenophobia.”
“The Refugee Convention is as relevant today as it was when it was created, and the Home Secretary’s verbal attacks do not change the harsh realities that force people from Sudan, Afghanistan, and Iran to flee war and persecution.”
He added, “Instead of making incendiary speeches decrying the rights of people fleeing persecution and tyranny, Suella Braverman should concentrate on creating a functioning UK asylum system that addresses the massive backlog her policies have created so that the UK can meet its limited refugee responsibilities.”
Josie Naughton, chief executive officer of Choose Love, stated, “The Home Secretary is out of touch with modern times, not the global refugee convention.”
“To safeguard those escaping conflict zones, danger, and life and liberty risks, the 1951 UN Refugee Convention was passed. More than ever, the global community must unite behind it. We cannot resolve this issue by attempting to undermine basic human liberties. Collaboration is the only viable option.”
