|
23rd November 2006
Letter
to the Daily Mail
Re: “400,000 and rising, the backlog of failed asylum seekers”
Dear Mr Slack,
Having read your article “400,000 and rising, the backlog of failed asylum seekers”, I am troubled that refugees have been misrepresented in such a way.
Under the 1951 Refugee Convention, a refugee is defined as a person who has a well-founded fear of persecution. In the United Kingdom, it is the Secretary of State which accepts or denies a claim for asylum and it is only at that grant of asylum that a person is officially recognised as a refugee.
In regard to some of the terminology you use in your report, it is no more accurate to describe someone as a “bogus” or “failed” refugee as it would to describe a parliamentary candidate who fails to be elected, a “bogus” politician. As you are aware, and do use correctly at other points in your article, if a person’s asylum claim is denied, they are simply an “unsuccessful” or a “failed” asylum seeker.
By referring to refugees as “bogus” you are misinforming your readers and misrepresenting refugees -- persons fleeing persecution. Hostile and alarmist media coverage of asylum issues and refugees undermines the lives of those who have had to flee persecution, rather than inform any legitimate public debate on these issues.
Over the years we have greatly appreciated the UK media’s more accurate coverage of the asylum situation and its usual diligence in the careful use of terminology relating to asylum seekers and refugees. The UN Refugee Agency is saddened that such a misrepresentation occurred and hopes that The Daily Mail will consider rectifying this by publishing a clarification at your earliest convenience.
Yours Sincerely,
Peter Kessler
Senior External Affairs Officer
|
