Our articles are written by experts in their field and include barristers, solicitors, judges, mediators, academics and professionals from a range of related disciplines. Family Law provides a platform for debate for all the important topics, from divorce and care proceedings to transparency and access to justice. If you would like to contribute please email editor@familylaw.co.uk.
Spotlight
A day in the life Of...
Read on

Domestic Abuse Bill

Date:6 MAY 2021
Third slide

Aaron Gates-Lincoln, Immigration News

After years of development the Domestic Abuse Bill returned to the House of Lords in the UK on the 8th March 2021 to complete its report stage, one of the final stages before being enshrined in law.

The Bill is expected to completely transform the effectiveness of current responses to domestic abuse amongst a variety of services. Its main features include placing safe accommodation service funding on a statutory footing and outlawing threats of non-fatal strangulation, post-separation abuse and sharing intimate images. It also intends to ban the direct cross-examination of survivors by their abusers in court and will importantly give the first ever legal definition of domestic abuse.

However, the Bill unjustly leaves women with insecure immigration status and No Recourse to Public Funds with little to no protection. This comes as a result of its ignorance of the issues that exist within accessing the current British welfare system, which can exacerbate economic abuse.

Currently, those with No Recourse to Public Funds face barriers particularly in accessing refuge accommodation. This is because they are ineligible to claim benefits which many survivors rely on to financially support their stay in a refuge.

Further explaining the issue whilst in the House of Lords, Baroness Meacher stated, 'Migrant women with insecure immigration status are, in my view very understandably, reluctant to report domestic abuse to the statutory services'.  This is because, as a result of the current hostile environment policies that have been in place since 2012, police routinely share personal data about domestic abuse victims with the Home Office for immigration control purposes. Many members of the House of Lords support an amendment that would prevent this from occurring.

Meacher stated on this, 'This reluctance [to report] is due to the current data-sharing agreements between statutory services, including the police and the Home Office, for immigration control purposes. This means that women affected cannot seek support or a safe place to go, with the most appalling consequences, as one can very easily imagine. Perpetrators are not being brought to justice.’

Article continues below...
Court of Protection Practice 2021
Court of Protection Practice 2021
'Court of Protection Practice goes from strength...
£319.99
Family Court Practice, The
Family Court Practice, The
Order the 2021 edition due out in May
£629.99
International Family Law Journal
International Family Law Journal
The practice title for family lawyers engaged...
£385

This fear to report is fully justified. Studies have found that since the policy of data sharing was created, the number of women deported after reporting domestic abuse has risen from 12% to 30%. This is worrying, as it reinforces a trend of criminalising the victim of domestic abuse for speaking up, rather than the perpetrator for their actions.

The Lord Bishop of London mirrored this anxiety, stating, 'I fear that this blind spot enables offenders and abusers to use police involvement as a threat to their victims, rather than the source of protection that it should be. Various countries around the world have demonstrated that firewalls can be and are being implemented in different ways to create separation between public services and immigration enforcement'.

On the 15th March, the House of Lords voted on two amendments to the Domestic Abuse Bill. These amendments would stop the use of data sharing between the police and the Home Office, and would also grant migrant women escaping domestic abuse temporary leave to remain and give them access to public funds and services. These amendments were both voted in favour. However, the current Conservative government all voted against the amendments, except from 3 ministers, showcasing a worrying lack of dedication to women’s safety by the party.

Furthermore, the Bill sadly does not cover other issues such as the way benefits are paid to women fleeing abuse. Universal credit is currently paid by default into one account when claimed jointly with a partner. Some argue it instead should be paid separately to each claimant by default, to prevent abusers from perpetrating economic abuse. These issues compound with other blanket issues such as budget cuts to refuge centres, making it hard for migrant women to escape abuse and gain support.

The blind spots in the Bill relating mostly to migrant women showcases a key issue within the current British government. Priority is too often given to upholding hostile environment policies. This has resulted in migrant women who live within the UK being forgotten, left behind and completely overlooked in a piece of legislation which should be designed to promote the protection of all women.

Although the amendments to the Bill have been added, pressure must still be applied to ensure that they remain within the Bill right through to its final stages. The voices of those that this is impacting must be amplified, and awareness must be spread of the risk that the passing of the Bill could pose if amendments are not made.


Aaron Gates-Lincoln is a correspondent for Immigration News, a media platform that helps raise awareness for migrant injustices and news around the world. 


 

Categories:
News