THE Scottish Government must step in between refugees and the wicked immigration policies of Westminster. If that means breaking the law, then so be it – some laws are so cruel they not only deserve to be broken, it’s a moral duty to break them.
What alternative is there now? A young mother, who was seeking asylum, has been found dead in Glasgow – her baby son beside her. Westminster’s abhorrent rules reduced her to destitution. The little boy was crying and weak from starvation when found.
The death of Mercy Baguma is beyond shaming. How can we call ourselves a civilised society after this?
READ MORE: Mercy Baguma: Mum 'found dead beside baby' in Glasgow flat
Westminster won’t change its policies. It will carry on regardless – humiliating, impoverishing, and scapegoating refugees. Immigration is reserved to London, so legally there’s little Edinburgh can do – but after Mercy’s death why should Westminster’s immigration laws matter? Whether it’s legal or not, Holyrood should act to protect those seeking asylum in Scotland and safeguard them from London’s legislative cruelty.
Mercy was in her 30s and from Uganda. She’d claimed asylum in Britain, but when she died, she was destitute. It appears she lost her job after her limited leave to remain expired. She relied on food from friends and charity. Her baby was taken to hospital and appears to be safe, but God knows what dreadful effects these terrible events will have on him later in life. That little boy is owed an enormous debt by us all.
We all know this isn’t the first time such dreadful suffering has been inflicted on innocent people by UK immigration laws. I’ve always believed that any civilised society should open its arms to refugees. The first response should be to believe their suffering and need for shelter, and offer them a safe haven. Doesn’t the memory of how the Western democracies failed the Jewish population of Europe in the 1930s demand that of us?
READ MORE: Hundreds of care homes banned from indoor visits while others miss government deadline
I can’t tolerate the argument that because there are some ‘bogus’ applicants for asylum that all should be treated with suspicion. What disgusting standards. The vast majority of refugees are fleeing persecution, torture, war and death. Do we have to remind ourselves that many are running because we started wars in their countries? Just look to Iraq and Afghanistan. We don’t just owe such people help, we should get down on our knees and beg forgiveness.
Treat everyone in the way you’d expect to be treated – without those standards we’re all finished. And when it comes to those fleeing because of financial reasons, I say, good on them. If I had to raise a baby in poverty and squalor you can be assured that the first thing I’d do is pack what little I had and head for the West with my children for a better life.
I first saw the reality of Britain’s immigration policies when I reported on Dungavel detention centre near Strathhaven in the early 2000s. Refugee families with children were being kept like prisoners. Their anguish and misery stuck to me like a second skin. I couldn’t get their tears and suffering out of my mind.
You may notice I use the word ‘refugee’ not ‘asylum seeker’. It’s deliberate. I recall Tony Blair’s Home Office badgering me, telling me I must use the term ‘asylum seeker’, with its wilfully negative connotations, when reporting on Dungavel. I asked them if they’d like me to go back and rewrite newspapers from the 1930s so ‘Jewish refugees’ were referred to as ‘Jewish asylum seekers’.
Then in 2004, I met three Iranian refugees in Glasgow. Their appeals to stay in Britain had failed. They were going to be sent back to Iran, which Britain denounces for its horrific human rights abuses. In protest, the three men had sewn their lips together and went on hunger strike. I remember sitting in a room where the three lived, as one of their friends told me their stories of fear and suffering, and feeling disgust at this country of ours – that we couldn’t extend the hand of friendship to those in such desperate need.
What ‘bogus asylum seeker’ sows their own mouth shut, for god sake? What ‘bogus asylum seeker’ risks rape at the hands of people traffickers? What ‘bogus asylum seeker’ faces drowning in a dingy to get to Britain? Only the desperate, only those in need, only those who we’ve a moral duty to help, take such measures.
Still nothing changed. Children imprisoned with their parents in Dungavel. Iranian men stitching their mouths closed. Nothing pricked the hard heart of Westminster, and the years ticked by. It’s almost impossible not to see such policies as racist.
Then came the death of Alan Kurdi in 2015 – a three year old Syrian boy lying drowned on a Turkish beach. Politicians offered their phoney, empty ‘thoughts and prayers’ – and still nothing changed. On it’s gone, more deaths, more suffering. Just this May, Syrian refugee, Adnan Walid Elbi, was found dead in a Glasgow guest house, where he’d been forcibly moved under Home Office orders.
One of the few people to actually do anything for refugees in Scotland is Robina Qureshi, who runs the refugee charity Positive Action in Housing. She’s raised her voice in anger year after year demanding change and justice. She deserves a medal for her fight against Britain’s inhuman immigration policies.
But the fight can’t be left to people like Qureshi alone. If the Scottish Government gives a damn about humanity then it needs to act, not just talk. Edinburgh should forbid any Scottish public servant – including police – from taking part in actions which are detrimental to refugees. Establish a state fund to pay an income to refugees when Westminster leaves them destitute. Set up an inquiry into the death of Mercy Baguma and the operation of immigration policies in Scotland. Let’s see if Westminster would dare take Holyrood to court for breaking immigration laws. In fact, switch that around – Holyrood should sue Westminster for human rights abuses in Scotland.
The SNP says it stands with refugees. Well, let’s not wait for independence to see that in action – let’s see it right now, so we’ve proof that the SNP really does want to create a better Scotland. We can’t delay. We can’t have more souls like Mercy Baguma, and her little boy, on our collective conscience.
Our columns are a platform for writers to express their opinions. They do not necessarily represent the views of The Herald.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel