Misleading Home Office Guidance Raises Deportation Concerns For Hong Kong protester In The UK

A person from Hong Kong, who fled to the UK after being targeted by Chinese security officials, is now concerned about possible deportation due to being given incorrect advice by the UK Home Office.

Using the pseudonym Olivia, she left Hong Kong in July 2022 after an individual claiming to be from the newly established national security department, formed following the implementation of a strict security law by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in the city, confronted her on the street. The person accused Olivia of supporting Hong Kong independence. She states that they also surveilled her outside her apartment and contacted her through social media. Due to her previous involvement in pro-independence protests during her time as a student, Olivia lived in constant fear, leading her to book a flight out of Hong Kong.

In 2019 and 2020, Olivia actively participated in Hong Kong’s pro-democracy demonstrations, which saw millions of people taking to the streets to oppose a proposed bill that would have allowed individuals critical of the Chinese government to be extradited to mainland China for trial. Over time, the protests expanded to include broader demands for democracy and freedom.

In June 2020, the Hong Kong government suppressed the protests by implementing a national security law imposed by Beijing. This law criminalized activities such as secession, subversion, and collusion with foreign forces. The broad and ambiguous nature of these terms has effectively silenced almost all criticism of China.

When Olivia traveled to the UK, she was unable to apply for the British national (overseas) visa, also known as the BNO visa. This visa was only available to individuals (and their dependents) who had registered before the handover of Hong Kong from British to Chinese sovereignty in 1997. Since Olivia was born after that date and was traveling alone without her parents’ BNO status, she did not meet the eligibility requirements.

Consequently, Olivia sought asylum instead, becoming part of a group of Hong Kong residents who have sought refuge in the UK to escape persecution. However, they have faced challenges, including being placed in temporary accommodations, experiencing exploitation and abuse, and enduring long waiting periods to find out if they will be granted asylum.

Last November, there was a glimmer of hope for Olivia when the UK government extended its visa program to include younger individuals who were more likely to have actively participated in the protests of 2019 and 2020.
Shortly after the expansion of the BNO scheme, Olivia reached out to the Home Office via email, seeking to amend her asylum application. Unlike asylum seekers, Hongkongers with a BNO visa have the opportunity to work in the UK, and their visa applications are processed more expeditiously. Olivia expressed her reluctance stating, “It might take years to wait for asylum, I don’t want to wait that long.”

However, in February, she received a devastating blow when her application for the expanded scheme was rejected. The Home Office had classified her as an “overstayer,” considering her in violation of immigration laws, thus rendering her ineligible for a BNO visa.

The government’s guidelines regarding BNO visa assessments stipulate that the applicant cannot be on “immigration bail,” a term that applies to asylum seekers like Olivia who are not held in detention while their claims are being processed. Acting on the advice of her Home Office case worker, Olivia withdrew her asylum application in January in order to commence her BNO application.

However, by withdrawing her asylum application, Olivia no longer had an official status as an asylum seeker and remained in the UK without legal permission to stay. This left her in a state of immigration uncertainty, fearing potential deportation while she awaits the outcome of her appeal against the rejection of her BNO status claim. Unfortunately, the appeal process is expected to last for at least six months or longer.

Olivia expresses her confusion, saying, “I didn’t know what to do. I read the immigration law. It says if I was applying for asylum, I am regarded as being on immigration bail, but if I withdraw [the asylum application], I am an overstayer. So whether I withdraw it or not, I can’t apply for the BNO visa. But they didn’t tell me that.”

The Home Office advised Olivia to seek legal counsel before withdrawing her asylum claim. However, lacking access to a lawyer, she turned to Hong Kong Aid, a support group, who instructed her to follow the Home Office’s guidance. It is now evident that following those instructions unintentionally caused Olivia to unknowingly breach the immigration laws of the UK.

According to Ivan Yim, co-founder of Hong Kong Aid and a successful asylum claimant himself, the conflicting advice given to individuals like Olivia has created false hope. He says, “We strongly recommend that Hongkongers seeking asylum continue their claim until the Home Office has clear instructions”.

Yim believes, “The UK government is historically responsible for what happened in Hong Kong, and they should provide a lifeboat for those on the frontline of Hong Kong’s freedom.”

The Home Office declined to respond to inquiries regarding Olivia’s specific situation. Furthermore, they have not refunded her £250 BNO application fee. A spokesperson from the Home Office stated, “We are continuing to deliver on our historic and moral commitment to the people of Hong Kong and expect to welcome more Hongkongers to our country, where they can settle into their lives here.”

The majority of BNO applications are typically approved. However, there has been a gradual increase in the number of rejections. The specific reasons for these refusals are not publicly disclosed. As of the end of March, 71 individuals, including Olivia, have been denied BNO status this year after applying from within the UK.

Among those seeking to switch to a BNO visa in the UK are Hongkongers who may include students and tourists. Additionally, there are 166 Hong Kong asylum seekers awaiting a decision, for whom obtaining a BNO visa would offer a more secure pathway to settlement. Unfortunately, there is currently no clear method for these individuals to benefit from the recently expanded scheme.
As for Olivia, she is uncertain about her future if the Home Office were to reject her BNO application. She states, “I can’t go back to Hong Kong.”