We believe the below information to be accurate, however we encourage all journalists to do their own research, especially getting hold of court proceedings transcripts - we hope this document encourages you to do so.

The Home Office built Yarl’s Wood like a sort of enclave of crown land in a remote part of Bedfordshire - they satisfied the public, already preconditioned by tabloid hysteria they helped to fuel, by saying it was a “removal centre” where “failed” asylum seekers would be held 24 hrs prior to removal. Inside the office-like exterior was actually a timber-framed building and everything that happened inside seemed to have immunity from any of the normal human rights protection we thought everyone was afforded.

Immunity from the norm seemed to extend to putting profit before lives - the Home Office decided not to fit a sprinkler system and subcontracted the management to Group4, a private profit making company. Group4’s canteen culture included such self-admitted ‘sick jokes’ as calling the central corridor the Green Mile (as in the Death Row of an American Prison). Military jargon was rife. Wings were called Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, Delta. Offices and teams had beefed-up names like Silver Suite and Gold Command. The Judge said “Their behaviour is inconsistent with their office”, reflected in Group4’s recent advert for Detention Custody Officer (DCO) positions for £6. 95 an hour (“no experience necessary”) - some were expected to start the job with only 5 hours training behind them. No wonder the judge said “it raises serious questions about the sort of people who are given responsibility for the custody of vulnerable people who are being held without having committed any crime, often for an unlimited period”. We are not sure if the judge is aware Group4 employed the local BNP candidate.

DCOs used depersonalising terms like ‘child females’ and ‘child males’ for children. One DCO witness said a defendant was summoned to the office, only then to be told to “piss off”. Subjected to a complex legal process in a foreign language, many found it impossible to contact solicitors, some of whom extorted money from the detainees. A book of immigration rules was alleged to have been removed after a detainee had used it to claim her rights. Meanwhile, detainees read in the tabloids that they were being pampered in a 5 star luxury hotel.

The daily injustice quietly goes on behind locked doors in the Home Office’s “detention estate”. They hope no one notices. Our campaign’s complaints have been ignored. This trial didn’t touch on the reasons for and conditions of immigration detention, but through it at least a few issues have been evidenced.

The Yarl’s Wood incident on February 14th 2002 was sparked by Group4 pinning a 55 year old woman to the ground. She had been denied medical treatment that day and was told by the nurse “shut up and get out of my office”. Having had no pain relief all day, she went to go to the chapel around 7. 30 pm. She was denied access. She reacted emotionally. Four DCOs had her on the ground - one at her head, one on each arm, one on her legs - they dragged her into a stairwell and locked her in. Described by the Prosecution as hysterical, this woman has been walking with a stick since the incident and by the end of her detention has a first degree uterine prolapse requiring an operation.

Male detainees saw what was happening through a small window within a door. They were outraged. A large scale incident ensued. Group4 lost control immediately. Fires started. One DCO called a manager and asked what he should do - no advise was offered. Group4 Head of Security & Operations gave the order for staff to get out, and an order was given to lock detainees in the burning building (remember - timber-framed building with no sprinklers). Access by fire-fighters was delayed - a fire fighter described how they were demoralised because they were prevented from doing their job. Police were not given access until 01. 00 am. Never having had fire training or completed a single fire drill including detainees, Group4 staff were told “play it by ear”. A Group4 manager was asked “How could detainees escape fire? ” - he said “don’t know”.

Even the frantic calls for help by Group4 staff still trapped inside were denied. A nurse restored to calling her family and asking them to call the police. Detainees were left to rescue each other, and staff. We have heard it took six men 20 minutes to smash one of the special reinforced glass windows to get out.

Many detainees lost things in the fire - a precious addresses book, a family photo, clothes, immigration papers. For some it was their entire worldly possessions - some never got them back and did not receive compensation covered by insurance.

After the fire, detainees were put in Segregation. Detainees describe freezing conditions, and how staff would shout “stand back !”, and throw food in on the floor. Having seen TV coverage, worried friends and family didn’t know whether detainees were dead or alive. 49 were transferred to prisons. Thirteen were charged - two were already out on bail, one already had Exceptional Leave to Remain, the other 40-odd were in prison without charge.

The Yarl’s Wood defendants in custody were transferred from one prison around the country to another, where some suffered racial abuse and the prison said they couldn’t guarantee their safety. Several of them attempted suicide. Eventually 8 got bail, for one it was a year later when the arson charge against him was dropped. Two remained the full 16 months in prison - one of them in and out of the medical wing and hospital on suicide-watch.

On bail, the defendants are denied both the right to work or claim benefits. Despite their forced destitution, they have been obliged to attend court every day for 15 weeks, depending on supporters for subsistence.

During the trial we learned that despite having had every opportunity to do so, there were no charges of direct assault towards Group4 staff - we did hear about detainees helping DCO’s and fellow detainees get out of the burning building. For example, Behar Limani to a DCO : “get out, save yourself, I’ll get them out”. One DCO - saved by detainee, who received a letter of thanks from that DCO, shortly before he was taken away to be deported. Defendants Tuka and Jacobs saved another DCO who was suffering from asthma, Jacobs putting his arm around the DCO and telling him it would be OK. The DCO recognised defendant Agron Kastrioti “who he regarded as a good man and hugged him. He told Kastrioti to take care”. Detainees attempted to put out fires, forming a human chain at one point.

The police couldn’t take over the running of Yarl’s Wood - we think it’s fair to say that it wasn’t a police led investigation. Judge said “The Codes of conduct for investigating procedures have been comprehensively in terms of every code.... Once Group4 was set up as a security firm keeping, in effect, prisoners, they are bound by the codes”

The Prosecution did agree the investigation process was “rough and ready”. Perhaps influenced by the impending litigation between Group4 and the police - Group4 management put up a staff notice encouraging them not to co-operate with police, not to hand over any notebooks, that all interviews were to go via Group4 Centre Manager - a “wholly improper” process and it was concluded that we “don’t know how many buckled under the pressure”. The police threatened to interview Group4 senior management under caution for obstructing offences. A “Rogues Gallery” of photos of those in Segregation was place on an office wall and witnesses encouraged to make identifications. A witnesses was shown photos before an ID parade, in which there was only one detainee - identifiable by standard issue clothing. Whilst detainees were segregated so they could not “rig” their story, Group4 conducted counselling sessions in which they claim no suspects names were discussed - only feelings were discussed - but Group4 witnesses did agree there was “an element of name swapping”. Group4 ignored the CPS’ instruction to immediate cease counselling sessions. Similarly, Group4 ignored instructions to stop “what amounted to unlawful witness coaching” - participants claimed they couldn’t remember anything about the training, one denied he had any training but his name appeared on a list of 16, revealed in the later stages of the trial.

The evidence taken altogether, including Group4 witnesses, proved to be so unreliable that by the end of half-time submissions, 8 out of a total of 16 charges had been dropped. One pair was described thus - “each witness as bad as each other”, and one witness as “not a good witness - allegations of conspiracy” (in fact the Prosecution said the worst one they ever had), and one accused defendant Tuka of smashing a camera - but when Tuka stood up in court the witness said that wasn’t Tuka.

Over 100 MP’s signed EDM1048 calling for a freeze on deporting Yarl’s Wood eye-witnesses, as did Amnesty International in a letter to David Blunkett. They were ignored. Immigration Minister Beverly Hughes assured the public “no one has been removed without the police being given opportunity to interview them” but she failed to ensure this actually happened - Lucky Jacobs identified 8 witnesses - not one of which was approached. The Prosecution agreed the process was “not flawless”. It was disastrous. 19 of Thomas Kalu’s witnesses were deported - at best, this could be familiar Home Office incompetence - at worst, malicious. Lucky Jacobs identified Vera Semenya as a key witness on 27th February 2002 - but his interview was not processed until 31st May 2002 - she was removed on 12th April 2002 without a statement having been taken. Arrangements were made for her to return to give evidence - she made a lengthy journey to get to the British Embassy in her country but was denied necessary clearance to fly to the UK. Photos together with names and whereabouts of detainees was not made available to the defence until Feb 2003.

At the time of writing (12/08/03) four men have been acquitted. Petr Hubres first walked free. Klodjan Gaba was instantly re-arrested, moved around detention centres which hindered contact with his solicitor - he was removed to Albania. Klodjan had fled Albania when he was 17 with his parents following the murders of other family members. They were split up and his parents were on the boat behind him - it sank and his parents bodies were never recovered. He was poorly represented in his asylum claim, leading to asylum application being refused despite a very strong claim. Thomas Kalu and Agron Kastrioti were also instantly re-arrested, taken to police cells from where Thomas Kalu was bailed a couple of days later. Agron Kastrioti was moved after 4 days to high security prison HMP Woodhill who wrongfully understood him to have been convicted instead of acquitted of the charge against him. He was later released on bail. Naseem Mostaffa was found not guilty of Arson and Violent disorder. Admitting that he lobbed a half-empty plastic bottle towards a distant line of officers in riot gear outside the detention centre (one of whom said they didn’t feel threatened), he pleaded guilty to Affray. Having been in prison for 16 months on remand, he had served his sentence. Nevertheless, he was also re-arrested and remains in prison. Aliane Ahmed : the arson charge against him was dropped and he pleaded guilty to Violent Disorder - since he had been on remand for 14 months he had served his sentence, however he continues to be held in prison. He has been detained under immigration powers for more than two years and is kept under special surveillance as he has attempted to suicide a number of times. Despite seeing what happened to their friends, the defendants have - against many obstacles - attended court every day for 15 wks.

Demands

The defendants should be granted leave to remain or at least be given time to pursue their asylum cases fairly instead of being deported with unseemly haste. They were locked up in an unsafe detention centre, went through the trauma of the fire, and faced prosecution for a situation which was the responsibility of the Centre Managers and the Home Office.

CPS

• Prosecute Group4 and the Home Office for Unlawful Imprisonment and Recklessly Endangering lives. The Home Office is responsible for Immigration & Asylum policy, the fulfilment thereof, including parties it subcontracts to - therefore it is just as much responsible for Group4’s actions as Group4 itself is.
• Explain why the prosecution was pursued when 8 out of 16 charges end up being dropped before the jury goes out.

Group4

• Some detainees’ and campaigners’ complaints about Group4 have been demonstrated to be well-founded during the course of the trial proceedings. We call for other complaints that have emerged to be investigated, for example the statement that detainees were mistreated out of sight of the CCTV (p3. 4, p3. 5) and the claim that a Group 4 manager ordered detainees to be locked in the burning building.
• This manager should be removed from a position where he has responsibility for the safety of immigration detainees and asylum seekers.
• There was the similar Campsfield 9 case spectacularly collapsed in 1998 after Group4 evidence was deemed unreliable, now the Yarl’s Wood fire where they have been investigated for Corporate Manslaughter, quite apart from their disasters in Australia, the West Bank, and elsewhere... what exactly will it take to stop Group4? They directly or indirectly run 5 Removal Centres, have been awarded the contract to run Logford House Removal Centre, and still hold the contract to run Yarl’s Wood which is planned to re-open next month with the same standards of recruitment as before. We demand an enquiry into the granting of contracts to Group 4 given their proven record in the mismanagement of detention centres.

Home Office

• Investigation into the legality and moral soundness of detaining people in unsafe conditions. Yarl’s Wood was a timber-framed building with no sprinklers or fire hoses, despite the Bedfordshire Fire Authority’s recommendation, highlighted by the FBU in 2000 saying that Yarl’s Wood was “a disaster waiting to happen”
• Justify and be accountable for why no sprinkler system was fitted, why fire-fighters and police were delayed access.
• Justify how Yarl’s Wood can be re-opened, by Group4, without the benefit of the recommendations of the overdue Home Office Inquiry
• Justify not conducting a full Public Inquiry
• Be clear and accurate in the description of the purpose and realities of removal centres, to the local Bedford community, and the rest of the UK.
• In light of the recent report by Chief Inspector of Prisons Anne Owers describing some Removal Centres as “unsafe” and “unfit accommodation”, and the fact that the same scenario of frustration and injustice that existed before the Yarl’s Wood fire exists around the detention estate today.... justify the policy of indefinite arbitrary detention with research and evidence
• Account for the still missing 5 detainees. Justify continuing to conceal their identities.

In “Secure Borders, Safe Haven”, David Blunkett says...

• “The nonsense of the claim that people coming through the Channel Tunnel, or crossing in container lorries, constitutes an invasion... ”
• “... migrants do not compete for jobs with existing workers. The idea that there are only a fixed number of jobs in the economy has been discredited. Migrants can also expand sectors, create new businesses and jobs, thereby increasing production and employment opportunities for existing workers”.

Home Office mixed messages have facilitated the criminalisation of asylum seekers and other migrants when we should recognise their net contribution... young migrants typically come ready-educated and in good health - i. e. we won’t have to spend money on education and health - they are hungry to work and pay tax - and it’s likely they will return home before pensions come into the equation. They are net contributors - why spend money locking them up !

sady_campaign@yahoo.co.uk