1 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
VISA PROBLEMS FOR
AFRICAN VISITORS TO
THE UK
This is not an ofcial publication of the House of Commons or the House of Lords. It
has not been approved by either House or its committees. All-Party Parliamentary
Groups are informal groups of Members of both Houses with a common interest in
particular issues. The views expressed in this report are those of the group.
A joint All-Party Parliamentary Group Report by the APPG
for Africa, the APPG for Diaspora, Development & Migration
and the APPG for Malawi
3 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
Contents
5
6
7
8
11
13
13
15
15
17
17
19
21
21
22
23
25
26
27
28
29
29
31
31
33
34
35
36
38
41
41
43
Acknowledgements
Abbreviations
Foreword
Executive summary
Introduction
Section 1 - UK Migration Policy as set out by Government, and awareness
of constraints
1.1 Historical Overview of Migration Policy in the UK
1.2 Migration Management in the UK
1.3 Constraints on UK Migration Policy
Section 2 - UKVI hub and spoke model and application challenges
2.1 Impacts of network consolidation in Africa
2.2 Practical, logistical and financial barriers
Section 3 - Entry clearance decision making
3.1 Inconsistent and unfair decision making
3.2 Erroneous issue and refusal notices
3.3 Assumptions regarding wealth
3.4 Seeming Discrimination
3.5 Lack of procedural fairness
3.6 No right of appeal and weak quality control
3.7 Under-resourcing of staff
3.8 The role of the Chief Inspector for Borders and Immigration
3.9 Response and Remedy
Section 4 - Impact on UK interests
4.1 Business, trade and investment
4.2 Government Relations
4.3 Incoherent cross-departmental working
4.4 Academic Exchange
4.5 Cultural Exchange
4.6 People to people links
Section 5 - Conclusion & Recommendations
5.1 Conclusion
5.2 Recommendations
Annexes (in online Appendix)
Annex 1: Overview of International Migration Context
Annex 2: RAS Independent Visa Advice
Annex 3: Recommendations in Tabular Form
4 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
Promotional image of In Search of Dinozord by Faustin Linyekula / Studios Kabako, presented at The Place during LIFT 2018. Photographer, Agathe Poupeney
5 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
This report was researched and co-written by:
Paul Asquith (AFFORD-UK / APPG for Diaspora, Development & Migration)
Henrietta Bailey (Royal African Society / APPG for Africa)
David Hope-Jones (Scotland Malawi Partnership /APPG for Malawi)
Ambreena Manji (African Studies Association UK)
Nick Westcott (Royal African Society)
The joint APPG investigation to inform the report was led by Chi Onwurah MP, Patrick
Grady MP and Jeremy Lefroy MP. Thank you to all other parliamentarians that have
taken an interest in the inquiry and participated in our evidence gathering meetings.
Thank you to those that submitted evidence to the investigation- there are too many
to list here! (Please see online Appendix
1
) And to all those that attended the initial
hearing in January and shared their experiences of the UK visit visa system.
Special thanks to Iain Halliday at McGill & Co Solicitors for his assistance in fact
checking the report and to David Bolt, the Independent Chief Inspector for Borders
and Immigration for sharing his invaluable insight.
The design and printing of the report was undertaken by D237 and paid for jointly by
The Royal African Society, AFFORD, the Scotland Malawi Partnership and the African
Studies Association-UK.
Acknowledgements
1
Online Appendix for
Report- http://bit.ly/
APPGvisas (June 2019)
6 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
Abbreviations
AFFORD-UK African Foundation for Development
APPG All Party Parliamentary Group
ASA-UK African Studies Association UK
BICS Home Office Borders, Immigration and Citizenship Service Strategy
CTA Common Travel Area
DMC Decision Making Centre
DFID Department for International Development
DIT Department for International Trade
ECM Entry Clearance Manager
ECO Entry Clearance Officer
FCO Foreign and Commonwealth Office
HMG Her Majesty’s Government
ICIBI Independent Chief Inspector for Borders and Immigration
RAS The Royal African Society
SMP Scotland Malawi Partnership
UKVI UK Visas and Immigration Service
VAC Visa Application centre
7 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
The difficulties faced by many Africans wishing to visit Britain in obtaining a visa has
been a growing problem for a number of years. It has been raised with many MPs
directly, including many of the members of our three APPGs. We therefore wished to
find out the true scale and nature of the problem so that something can be done
about it. This report is the result of our investigation, though we should emphasise
that evidence continues to pour in of the problems we highlight and will be included
in the online Appendix
2
. Annex 2 found in the Appendix also provides some informal
guidelines and advice to follow when applying for visit visas
3
.
The evidence we received has been clear and consistent. We concluded that not only
are the problems real, persistent and pervasive, but they are quite easily remediable;
and that unless they are remedied, the damage to Britain’s own interests will continue
to grow. Visas remain one of the major factors affecting - for the worse - the UK’s
relations with many African countries. As we approach a fundamental change
in Britain’s place in the world, we must act fast to resolve the problems that are
identified in the report and make access to visas for African visitors smoother, more
consistent and more reliable if we are to be able to make Britain the global player
that we aspire to and build equal and mutually beneficial relations with our African
partners.
We would like to extend thanks to all those who contributed evidence, to those who
sifted it and prepared the report for the APPGs, and to all the MPs who have played an
active part in the inquiry.
Foreword
Chi Onwurah MP
Chair of the APPG for
Africa
Patrick Grady MP
Chair of the APPG for
Malawi
Jeremy Lefroy MP
Chair of the APPG
for Diaspora,
Development &
Migration
2
Online Appendix for
Report- http://bit.ly/
APPGvisas (June 2019)
3
Annex 2- RAS Independent
Visa Advice, June 2019 (See
online Appendix)
8 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
Our coalition of APPGs has been concerned for some time with the question of the
high level of visa refusals for African nationals seeking to visit the UK, for professional
or business reasons. Home Office data on visa refusals shows that African applicants
are over twice as likely to be refused a UK visa than applicants from any other part
of the world. The UK has good relations with most African countries, but it needs
to be recognised that no single issue does more potential damage to the image
or influence of the UK in Africa than this visa question. The fact that refusals for
applicants from Africa in 2018 were running at more than double the global average
suggests that something is amiss
4
. The situation needs to be addressed.
Our APPGs have therefore undertaken to coordinate the gathering of as much hard
evidence on this issue as possible and particularly in cases where visas appear to
have been unjustifiably refused, to the detriment not only of the individual concerned
but to British national interests. To that end it invited submissions and held a well-
attended hearing in January 2019, the outcome of which has been discussed in
detail by the Group with the Minister for Immigration. Records of those meetings are
appended to the report
5
. The bulk of the evidence presented comes from UK-based
organisations from the private, public and third sectors who have invited Africans to
visit the UK for bona fide activities and events which benefit both parties. We have
also received some evidence from African governments about official visits.
Drawing on the evidence presented to them, the APPGs identified six specific
challenges faced by Africans in applying for visas to the UK:
1. Practical and logistical barriers: The rationalisation of visa services has meant
that few decisions are now made in the country of application, and for several
African countries visa applications as well as interviews can only be done in
a neighbouring country. This imposes significant costs, inconvenience and
in some cases hardship on some African applicants. The volume and type
of documentation required as well as the process is considered particularly
demeaning by visitors, who feel that they are treated differently from visitors from
other regions.
2. Inconsistent and/or careless decision-making: Evidence was presented of
apparently irrational decisions that overlooked some of the information provided
with a visa application, divergent decisions taken in effectively identical cases,
and different decisions taken when an identical re-application was made, all of
which reduces trust in the process and increases frustration.
3. Perceived lack of procedural fairness: In many cases additional documentation
and evidence is requested over and above that specified in the guidelines. The
Executive Summary
4
September 2018 Home
Office quarterly statistics
show that while 12% of all
visit visa applications made
between September 2016
and September 2018 were
refused, the refusal rate
for African visitors was
over double this, at 27% of
applications. For the Middle
East the figure was 11%.
For Asia it was also 11%. For
North America it was 4%.
Home Office, ‘Immigration
Statistics: Year Ending
September 2018—Data
Tables’, 29 November 2018
(see in particular Entry
Clearance Visas Granted
Outside the UK Data Tables:
Year Ending September
2018—Volume 1 (Table 2))
5
Online Appendix for
Report- http://bit.ly/
APPGvisas (June 2019)
9 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
guidelines need to be amended if these are a requirement, as already pointed
out by the Independent Chief Inspector of Immigration.
6
4. Financial discrimination in decision-making: Many applications are rejected
because the applicant has little money, even though all costs have been
guaranteed by a sponsoring third party. This has on many occasions prevented
churches, NGOs, charities, development agencies and academic institutions as
well as cultural festivals bringing people to the UK to take part in specific events.
This effectively amounts to discrimination on grounds of income.
5. Perceived gender or racial bias: The reasons given for rejection in some cases
appear to reflect a different standard applied to women applicants compared
with men, with additional and sometimes discriminatory evidence seemingly
requested. Other applicants also perceived racial discrimination in some of the
assumptions underlying reasons for rejection. These give an impression that the
‘hostile environment’ is extended into Africa.
6. Lack of accountability or a right of appeal: The lack of a right of appeal for visitor
visas and the apparent absence of oversight are seen to undermine the fairness
of the system, allowing prejudiced or inadequate decisions to pass un-contested
and uncorrected. The apparent randomness of the granting or rejection of visa
applications leads many applicants to believe there may be undisclosed quotas
for rejection or for the numbers of visas granted in a fixed period.
Overall, the impact of these challenges is to discourage many Africans with entirely
valid reasons for visiting the UK, e.g. to do business, spend money, perform or take
part in cultural and academic exchange, to choose not to do so, preferring to visit
other countries instead. This we deem not to be in the UK’s interests.
Every section of civic and associational life in the UK benefits in some way from the
close and historic links the UK enjoys with Africa. In business, culture, science, health,
education, academia and in countless other areas, people of the UK are actively
engaging with the people of Africa, for mutual benefit. These very positive interactions
are inherently reciprocal and, while there have been great technological advances
in remote communications, there is no substitution for two-way visits and face-to-
face, people-to-people, human interactions. Through each such visit we build mutual
understanding and deepen our bonds of cooperation and solidarity.
We recognise that a system of visas is necessary: there are some applicants with
illegitimate reasons to visit, or who deliberately intend to overstay. We are also aware
that the visa process works under significant resource constraints. But the current
level of dissatisfaction with the way the system works for African applicants, and for
UK organisations inviting African visitors, needs to be addressed in order to protect
the UK’s own national interests in developing good relations and exchanges with
African countries.
Based on the evidence received, the APPGs recommend a number of specific
improvements, set out in the final section. These are summarised briefly below, in
the order in which we believe they will have the greatest impact and indicating the
relative cost of the measures.
6
Independent Chief
Inspector for Borders
and Immigration, Entry
Clearance Decision Making:
A Global Review, June 2011
10 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
The key recommendations are:
To improve the application process:
1. Expedited application processes for those applicants who currently have to travel
to a neighbouring country to apply and/or be interviewed for a visa (low cost).
2. Clearer information to visa applicants on visa application processes and
requirements, especially in terms of supporting documents that must be
submitted by the applicant (low cost).
3. Where decision-making is fully digitized, ensure documents are scanned in the
country of application (medium cost).
4. More VACs in countries where they are not currently sited (higher cost).
5. Greater quality control of rejection letters before they are issued. In particular
to ensure the supporting evidence has been fully taken into account and that
the guidelines for clearance officers are changed so that the reasons for refusal
cannot be based on prejudicial or biased assumptions (medium/low cost).
6. Where there is clear and compelling evidence that a visit is fully-funded by a
credible UK-based sponsor, either remove the requirement for the applicant to
submit bank statements and prove affluence, or else publish the evidence-base
establishing the causal link between poverty and overstays (cost neutral).
7. High Commissions and Embassies should be allowed greater input to the
decision-making processes as a matter of course. Streamlined processes should
be explored to speed up and simplify the process for VIPs (low cost).
8. A reinforced Inspectorate, and monitoring of the implementation of the
Inspector’s recommendations, together with a more systematic relationship
between the Chief Inspector and the House of Commons Home Affairs Select
Committee (medium cost).
To improve decision-making:
11 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
This report is the result of a joint investigation by the APPG for Africa, the APPG for
Diaspora, Development and Migration and the APPG for Malawi. We began work in
December 2018 and continue to gather evidence. So whilst we are publishing the
investigation’s findings so far in this report, there is a considerable body of evidence
that is still growing, and which can be accessed in full via the online Appendix
7
accompanying this report. The case studies included in this report represent only a
sample of the information we have received both formally and informally that can be
found in the archive.
Our inquiry began with a public call for written evidence in December 2018 to which
we received 25 submissions initially followed by an oral hearing in Parliament in
January 2019 attended by over 40 different organisations from across sectors and
industry. We have gathered further information and evidence via written and oral
parliamentary questions, written correspondence with the Immigration Minister and
Secretary of State of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office and via Freedom of
Information Requests. We have also held roundtable meetings with the Immigration
Minister and Head of UKVI Visa Operations, the Independent Chief Inspector for
Borders and Immigration and the FCO Africa Director and other informal bilateral
meetings.
This report begins by briefly setting out in Section 1 the UK’s approach to Migration
Policy and management, along with the historical context and acknowledgment
of the constraints faced by policy makers. Section 2 of the report describes the
UKVI ‘hub and spoke’ network for visa applications, examining the implications of
network consolidation and highlighting common issues identified by stakeholders
relating to the application process. Section 3 sets out the key issues arising from
the UKVI entry clearance decision-making process supported by a number of case
studies. Section 4 looks at the impact visa refusals have on key sectors in the UK.
Finally, Section 5 draws some general conclusions from the investigation and makes
recommendations for changes in policy and approach to improve the service offered
by UKVI and avoid the problems that have arisen.
Introduction
7 Online Appendix for
Report- http://bit.ly/
APPGvisas (June 2019)
12 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
Home Ofce data on visa refusals
shows that African applicants are
over twice as likely to be refused
a UK visa than applicants from
any other part of the world. The
UK has good relations with most
African countries, but it needs to
be recognised that no single issue
does more potential damage to
the image or inuence of the UK in
Africa than this visa question.
“
”
13 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
Section 1
The UK maintains a mixed system of managed migration which includes migration
from other EU states as well as a points-based system for migrants coming from
outside the European Union.
It is important to distinguish between these two categories, as EU nationals who come
to the UK to visit, reside, study, or work are exercising their common rights under EU
Freedom of Movement. In discussions on immigration to the UK, this group of visitors is
all too often conflated with visitors to the UK coming from outside the EU.
The focus of this briefing paper is on visitors to the UK from outside the EU, specifically
from African countries.
Migration controls apply to all visitors to the UK from abroad, with the exception of
Ireland, the Isle of Man, and the Channel Islands, which form part of the Common
Travel Area (CTA) with the UK. Visa controls apply to all visitors to the UK from outside
of the EU, for any duration of stay or reason for visiting, although different visas are
available for different types of travel (e.g. tourism, study, business).
1.1 Historical overview of migration policy in the UK
As with most other European nation states, migration policy and border controls
arose in the UK in the early 20
th
century, a process that was intensified in the UK by
security concerns about foreign nationals during WWI. Passports were not widely
issued and used before this time.
As noted above, the Common Travel Area was established in the UK, Ireland, the Isle
of Man, and the Channel Islands in 1923, which extended a right to reside in the UK for
nationals of these territories.
The most significant shift in UK migration policy was arguably the introduction of the
British Nationality Act in 1948. This gave all British subjects in the then British Empire
(and subsequently Commonwealth) the right to travel to and work in the UK at a time
when the country was suffering severe labour shortages post-WWII.
This legislation was subsequently amended several times in the latter half of the
20
th
century, and new legislation introduced, to make it more restrictive in response
UK Migration Policy as set
out by Government, and
awareness of constraints
14 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
to popular concerns about mass migration among the public. Commonwealth
immigration, made up largely of economic migrants, rose from 3,000 per year in 1953
to 46,800 in 1956 and 136,400 in 1961.
8
In response to public concerns about migration,
a Cabinet committee was established in June 1950 to find “ways which might be
adopted to check the immigration into this country of coloured people from British
colonial territories”
9
. As a result of these legal changes, Commonwealth citizens lost
the right to travel to the UK without having first secured work in the country, and also
lost the automatic right of registration as British nationals, instead being required to
undergo naturalisation procedures in line with the nationals of other countries.
Immigration rules introduced under the Immigration Act 1971 were updated in 2012
10
to create a strict minimum income threshold for non-EU spouses and children to be
given leave to remain in the UK. These rules were subject to legal challenge, and the
Supreme Court found in 2017
11
that, while “the minimum income threshold is accepted
in principle”, the rules and guidance were defective and unlawful until amended to
give more weight to the interests of the children involved, and that sources of funding
other than the British spouse’s income should be considered.
12
The British Nationality Act 1948 was subsequently replaced by the British Nationality
Act 1981, which has been significantly amended several times, including by the:
• British Nationality (Falkland Islands) Act 1983
• Hong Kong Act 1985 and Hong Kong (British Nationality) Order 1986
• British Nationality (Hong Kong) Act 1990, which introduced the British Nationality
Selection Scheme
• Hong Kong (War Wives and Widows) Act 1996
• British Nationality (Hong Kong) Act 1997
• Adoption (Intercountry Aspects) Act 1999
• British Overseas Territories Act 2002
• Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002
• Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006
• Borders, Citizenship and Immigration Act 2009
The UK government introduced the Immigration Act in 2014, which makes provisions
to prevent private landlords from renting houses to people without legal status, to
prevent irregular migrants from obtaining driving licenses and bank accounts, and for
the investigation of sham marriages, and introduced what was at the time described
as a ‘hostile environment’ policy to deter irregular migrants from coming to, or staying
in, the UK. This was updated in 2016, one result of which was to place duties on a
range of individuals and organisations – ranging from banks, landlords, and public
services – to require proof of migration status from migrants, and where this was
lacking to share information about such individuals with the Home Office.
Although not a legal requirement of UK migration policy, from 2010 the UK government
sought to introduce explicit caps on migration flows to the UK as part of its manifesto
commitments, seeking to restrict inward net migration to the UK from outside the EU
to 100,000 people per annum or lower. This policy, which still proves controversial, has
never met this target. There is widespread concern that it is an unrealistic target that
has led to over-assertive efforts on behalf of UKBA to remove migrants or people of
migrant origin, even in cases of, as the recent Windrush scandal has shown, British
8
HC Deb 19 March 2003 vol
401 cc270-94WH
9
Ibid.
10
Annex 1- Overview of
International Migration
Context (See online
Appendix)
11
MM (Lebanon) v Secretary
of State for the Home
Department [2017] UKSC
available here - https://
www.supremecourt.uk/
cases/uksc-2015-0011.html
(Last accessed June 2019)
12
The impact on children
of the Family Migration
Rules (PDF), Children’s
Commissioner for England.
August 2015
15 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
Commonwealth citizens who are entitled to British citizenship or who have indefinite
leave to remain in the UK. Whether similar pressures have in any way influenced UKVI
decision-making with regard to visa applications from outside the EU remains to be
seen, but this is an important area for further inquiry.
1.2 Migration Management in the UK
In common with most modern states, UK migration policy seeks to achieve effective
management of migration stocks and flows to and from the UK. This is important to
keep track of who is coming into and out of the country – although it should be noted
the UK still does not record departures, only arrivals, in contrast to other EU states such
as Germany. More specifically, as EU citizens coming to the UK are not merely foreign
nationals but EU citizens exercising their treaty rights, ‘managed migration’ refers in
the UK to management of all legal migration flows and stocks from outside of the EU,
including short-term visitors, migrant labour, or students from abroad.
Such a migration management approach is needed to balance border security and
integrity with the needs of a UK economy where a number of sectors rely heavily on
labour migration to sustain growth. Indeed, from 2002 to 2008, the UK introduced the
Highly Skilled Migrant Programme to help fill labour shortages in certain professions;
this permitted access to UK labour markets even where the individual had not already
secured employment in the UK.
The UK established the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) in 2007 to provide policy
advice on migration.
In 2008, the UK replaced the Highly Skilled Migrant Programme with a points-based
system composed of five tiers:
• Tier 1 – for highly skilled individuals, who can contribute to growth and
productivity;
• Tier 2 – for skilled workers with a job offer, to fill gaps in the United Kingdom
workforce;
Tier 3 – for limited numbers of low-skilled workers needed to fill temporary
labour shortages; (which has never been implemented)
Tier 4 – for students;
Tier 5 – for temporary workers and young people covered by the Youth Mobility
Scheme, who are allowed to work in the United Kingdom for a limited time to
satisfy primarily non-economic objectives
This report focuses, however, on the issue of short-term visitors’ visas, as this is
where the most immediate problems have been identified. For all types of UK visa
applications, immigration officers have to be satisfied about a person’s nationality,
identity, and reasons for coming to the UK, and entry can be refused if they are not
satisfied.
1.3 Constraints on UK Migration Policy
The government continues to face significant constraints on developing and
implementing migration policy in the UK. These include the following:
16 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
• Resources and other practical factors: Management of migration requires
resources, both in systems and processes and human capital. UKVI, the
government agency ‘at the sharp end’ of managing migration to the UK has
had limited financial resources while dealing with an increased workload, as the
numbers of visitors to the UK have also increased.
• Legal factors: national and international legal frameworks and agreements
place obligations on the UK government in terms of how it treats migrants
and refugees in law. This in turn places limits on migration policy and its
implementation.
• Economic factors: The UK economy has relied on migrant labour to fill skills
shortages in a range of different sectors, and immigration has been one of the
drivers of UK economic growth over the last 30 years. The UK will continue to
need migrant labour for years to come, even with greater efforts to upskill British
workers.
• Political factors: the debate on migration in the UK is highly politically charged.
Whilst the public are aware of the positive economic, social, and cultural
contributions that migrants make to the UK, and public concern about
migration has decreased since 2016, migration remains a contentious issue.
Popular concerns about levels of migration have been linked – unfairly in most
cases - to increasing pressure on public services; availability of employment,
especially sustainable jobs with reasonable rates of pay; concerns about
security and terrorism; and concerns about the integration and/or assimilation
of migrants.
There is a strong case for reforming UK migration management policy and practice,
not least because it lacks coherency and consistency due to its particular historical
development. At a time when the UK is seeking to build new trade and economic
links with the world, this will require an immigration system and visa regime that will
support this.
As the UK prepares to leave the European Union, the government has proposed
harmonising the migration rules applied to EU nationals with those applied to visitors
from outside the UK as part of a unified immigration system. This has been promoted
by the government as a fairer approach to migration management, although it has
been criticised for ‘rounding down’ migrant rights, rather than improving the rights
of migrants overall in a consistent way. In the case of EU nationals coming to the UK
to visit, it is likely that a visa waiver scheme will be introduced (and for UK nationals
visiting the EU) that would enable visitors to visit (but not work) for up to 90 days.
However, this is dependent on the progress of Brexit negotiations.
The UK is in the process of developing a new migration policy post-Brexit that will
need to balance the need for migration at a range of skills levels, the capacity of local
areas to receive migrants, and the requests for improved visa access for nationals of
countries with which the UK seeks to sign trade and other agreements. Visitor visas for
Africans, as for all nationalities, should form part of this wider policy review, for which
the recommendations in this report need to be taken into account.
13
13
‘The UK’s future skills-
based immigration system’
(White Paper, Dec 2018)
– available at: https://
assets.publishing.service.
gov.uk/government/
uploads/system/uploads/
attachment_data/
file/766465/The-UKs-future-
skills-based-immigration-
system-print-ready.pdf
17 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
Section 2
UKVI “hub and spoke”
model and application
challenges
Since March 2007, the UK Government has gradually rolled out the “hub and spoke”
structure for the visa delivery system whereby applications to visit the UK are made at
Visa Application Centres (VACs), which act as the spokes, and the decisions on those
applications made at Decision Making Centres (DMCs), which are the hubs
14
. As the
reform was rolled out, the Government closed almost all visa sections based in British
High Commissions or Embassies to concentrate decision making in larger hubs. This
change was justified on the grounds that it enabled the then UK Border Agency (re-
launched by the Home Office in March 2013 as the UK Visas and Immigration Service,
UKVI) to improve the efficiency and consistency of entry clearance decision making, while
reducing overall costs.
15
2.1 Impacts of network consolidation in Africa
Detailed information on the workings of the current hub and spoke model in use in
Africa is not readily available online. However, the Office of the Immigration Minister
at the Home Office did release up to date information in May 2019 on written request
from the inquiry Chairs.
16
This indicates that from 2019 there will be only two Decision
Making Centres for the whole of Africa: one in Pretoria serving Visa Application
Centres in the African Horn and Southern, Central and Eastern Africa, and one in
Croydon which would deal with all decision making for West African VACs. This would
imply that over the past two years the Government has either closed or scaled-down
operations in DMCs reported in Accra and Abuja in 2017
17
which are not found on the
2019 list.
18
Nevertheless, a Home Office official (the Head of UKVI Visa Operations) told
the inquiry there are still small decision-making teams in Lagos and Abuja in Nigeria
and in Accra, Ghana and one member of visa staff in Nairobi, Kenya, and it is not clear
to the inquiry whether these will remain or disappear.
19
This is consistent with the process of network consolidation, through which the Home
Office is “onshoring” more decision making back to the UK DMCs. The consequence,
however, is that entry clearance decisions for African applicants are often made at
DMCs hundreds or thousands of miles from the place of application and, significantly,
far away from local expertise, context and insight that could previously be provided
by the local High Commissions or Embassies, which are now bypassed and excluded
from the process.
The Independent Chief Inspector for Borders and Immigration (ICIBI) report of July
14
House of Commons,
‘Written Question:
Immigration: Hub and
Spoke System’, HC Hansard,
8 February 2010, col 746W
15
House of Commons,
‘Written Question: Belarus’,
HC Hansard, 28 January
2014, col 470W
16
The. Rt. Hon. Caroline
Nokes MP, Letter to Chi
Onwurah MP, 19th May 2019
(See online Appendix)
17
UKVI, Response to
Freedom of Information
Request from N. Ostrand
(FOI Ref: 44306) 3rd July
2017. Source: https://
www.whatdotheyknow.
com/request/412644/
response/1000172/attach/3/
FOI%20Response%2044306.
pdf?cookie_passthrough=1
(last accessed June 2019)
18
UKVI, Response to
Freedom of Information
Request from Hetty Bailey
(FOI ref: 53632), 21st May
2019 (See online Appendix)
19
Hope-Jones, D & Bailey,
H, Short minutes of APPG
Africa meeting with Rt. Hon.
Caroline Nokes MP, 13th
February 2019 (See online
Appendix)
18 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
2017
20
commented that “Inevitably, this means fewer UKVI staff have first-hand
experience of the countries from which applications are received, and there is a risk
that this loss of local knowledge will impact adversely on decision quality.” When the
inquiry committee met with the current ICIBI, David Bolt, he reiterated his concern
that a lack of local knowledge may be having an adverse impact on decision making
quality. The onshoring policy as a whole is the subject of an ongoing ICIBI inspection.
Since 2007, many visa-granting facilities at UK missions have been closed across
Africa. Though most countries are now covered by one or more VACs, the following
24 countries still have no VAC, so applicants have to visit a neighbouring country to
apply for a visa: Benin, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cape Verde, Central African Republic,
Chad, Congo Brazzaville, Comoros, Djibouti, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Eswatini, Gabon,
Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Mali, Mauritania, Niger, Sao Tome and
Principe, Somalia and Togo; and the following countries have only a part-time VAC
(i.e. not open all working days) which can slow down the process: Ivory Coast (twice a
week) and Madagascar (twice a month).
21
In 2014, a £621 million contract
22
for the running of UKVI Visa Applications Centres
and Decision-Making Centres was granted to Teleperformance UK Ltd for an initial
five-year period. This was extended recently for two years until 31
st
March 2021 with
an option to extend again until 2023 with tendering to begin in 2019.
23
The Head of
UKVI Visa Operations told the inquiry using a private company had resulted in better
decision making quality and customer service and delivers better value for money to
tax payers.
24
David Bolt, the ICIBI, told the inquiry, he had not seen evidence to show
that ‘customer service’ and ‘value for money’ had improved. He had yet to examine
the Home Office contract with Teleperformance UK Ltd, and feared that the Home
Office might be reluctant to share it with him because of commercial and legal
concerns, despite it falling within the ICIBI’s statutory remit. The evidence gathered by
the inquiry also indicated clearly that it is not the perception of the customers that
either service levels or decision making have improved.
Earlier in 2019, we understand the Pretoria DMC moved to a system of digital
assessment, through which documents are scanned by the commercial partner, in
this case Teleperformance UK Ltd, and DMCs make decisions based on the electronic
files rather than seeing the actual documents. This process of digitisation seems to
be an integral part of the move to network consolidation and has the potential to
improve customer service given applicants need not necessarily be separated from
their personal documents. However, we understand that in Malawi and, we presume,
many other countries in Africa, this is not the case. We are informed that applicants
visit the VAC, submit their personal documents (passports, birth certificates, marriage
certificates, bank statements, wage slips, official letters, etc), and all these documents
are still couriered to Pretoria where they are scanned in by the same commercial
company that posted them from Lilongwe. Teleperformance UK Ltd then transfer the
digital files to the DMC, also in Pretoria, and await a decision before sending back the
physical documents. We are told informally by UKVI officials that this most surprising
approach to digitisation is the chosen model of the commercial partner rather than
being intended or prescribed by UKVI.
Moving to a digital system in which applicants’ essential personal documents are still
posted across the continent, just to be scanned in by the same company that sent
20
The Independent Chief
Inspector for Borders and
Immigration, An Inspection
of Entry Clearance
Processing Operations in
Croydon and Istanbul, July
2017
21
Source: https://www.gov.
uk/find-a-visa-application-
centre (last accessed 20th
June 2019)
22
https://data.gov.uk/data/
contracts-finder-archive/
contract/1394970/ (last
accessed 7th May 2019)
23
House of Commons,
‘Written Question: Visas:
Africa’, 11 September 2018,
169468
24
Hope-Jones, D & Bailey,
H, Short minutes of APPG
Africa meeting with Rt. Hon.
Caroline Nokes MP, 13th
February 2019 (See online
Appendix)
19 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
them, seems to show worryingly little regard for customer experience. It significantly
increases the cost, time and inconvenience of application, not least because
applicants cannot either travel internationally or apply for any other visas while their
UK visa application is being processed.
It is hard to imagine that this hub and spoke approach to digitizing documents would
lead to either decreased costs for HMG or increased quality of decision making. Even
if the commercial staff in Pretoria are trained to a higher level than their staff in the
VACs, it is unlikely they would be better able to identify fraudulent documents, given
they are scanning documents from a large number of different countries. In contrast,
VAC staff, who most typically are nationals from within that country, are well placed to
identify false documents at the point of digitization given, for example, this would be a
Malawian national scanning only Malawian passports and birth certificates.
2.2 Practical, logistical and financial barriers
As of 2019, there are just two Decision Making Centres (DMCs) and 32 Visa Application
Centres (VACs)
23
serving a continent of 1.3 billion people across 57 countries covering
a land mass of 11.5 million square miles. Therefore, it is no surprise that an African
national seeking to apply for a UK Visit Visa faces significant practical and logistical
barriers. These can be broadly grouped into four obstacles:
a. Cost: The price of a standard visitor visa itself - currently £95 for 6 months - is
significant
26
. This must be paid for online in a foreign currency and is non-
refundable if the application is unsuccessful. The immediate cost and risk of
losing that money and the necessity to access the internet all present early
barriers for many hopeful applicants. According to immigration Solicitor Iain
Halliday information via the telephone helpline is vague and expensive
27
and
UKVI levies a charge of £1.37 per minute for telephone calls and a £5.48 email
charge for overseas applicants.
28
Crucially, it is not possible to speak to the case
worker who is actually dealing with the application; only to call centre staff with
limited information and knowledge.
b. Documentation: after completing the online application, applicants are
required to attend an appointment in person at a VAC to provide biometric
data and original documents. The requirement to produce official marriage
and birth certificates and bank statements can present difficulties in countries
where such documentation is not always easily or cheaply available from
national authorities.
c. Travel and access: attending the nearest VAC in order to deposit the
application together with the biometric data often necessitates costly and
time-consuming long-distance travel over hundreds of miles across country
or across borders. Further, some accounts suggest that UKVI is not ensuring
safe access to their VACs in some parts of Africa and the ICIBI had heard
accounts of applicants being charged by non-UKVI employed staff to enter
VAC buildings.
d. Time consumption: decisions themselves can also be subject to long delays,
including waiting for an initial appointment, and the process can take weeks
25
The Rt. Hon. Caroline
Nokes MP, Minister of State
for Immigration, Letter to
Chi Onwurah MP 4th June
2019 (See online Appendix)
26
www.gov.uk/government/
publications/visa-
regulations-revised-table/
home-office-immigration-
and-nationality-fees-29-
march-2019 Last accessed
June 2019
27
Iain Halliday of McGill
& Co Solicitors, Written
Evidence to APPG, January
2019 (See online Appendix)
28 HL Hansard, 18 October
2018, col 564
20 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
adding to the expense of applying if one has had to travel to a distant city or
neighbouring country. The passport of the applicant is held for the duration
of the application whilst documents are couriered across the continent, often
just to be scanned in by the same commercial partner that sent them. Whilst
they wait, the applicant is generally unable to find out any information on the
status of their application as online tracking of applications has not been made
available for short-term visit visas.
In short, for many African applicants, the process is arduous, time-consuming and
expensive. This alone puts off not only casual or criminal applicants, but many who
have legitimate and beneficial reasons for visiting the UK.
Case Study: Applying for a Visa from Mauritania
The written submission from the Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania highlighted the
fact that all UK visa applications from Mauritania, including those with diplomatic passports,
are required to travel to the VAC in Rabat. For some in Mauritania, this is a round-journey of
over 4,000km to visit a VAC. Significantly, it also means that to start an application for a UK visa,
Mauritanian citizens have to first secure a Moroccan visa, just to visit a VAC. The Mauritanian
Embassy has said this is causing friction between Mauritania and Morocco, as Mauritanian
Ministers are reliant on a Moroccan ruling to accept an invitation to the UK from the UK
Government.
27
Liberian officials have also complained informally of the need to travel to Accra in Ghana to
apply for visas; and officials from the Ivory Coast say that, while there is now a VAC operating
in Abidjan two days a week, which avoids the need to travel to Accra, this can still mean
inconvenience and delay in submitting visa applications.
27
Embassy of the Islamic
Republic of Mauritania,
Written Evidence
Submission to APPGs,
January 2019 (See online
Appendix)
21 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
Section 3
UKVI entry clearance
decision making
Once the application arrives with an Entry Clearance Officer (ECO) at a DMC, the
application then has to satisfy five legal requirements in the immigration rules to
secure a UK visit visa. First, that the applicant intends to leave the UK at the end of
their visit (a subjective test known as the ‘genuine visitor test’). Second, that they will
not be effectively living in the UK through frequent or extended visits. Third, that they
are genuinely seeking entry for a purpose permitted by the visit visa rules. Fourth, they
are not carrying out any prohibited activities, such as work or study. And fifth, that
they have sufficient money to pay for the trip. The inquiry Chairs believe that it is not
the rules in themselves which are problematic but it is the application of these legal
requirements which is inconsistent and affects decision quality.
3.1 Inconsistent or unfair decision making
Under the first criteria, on which many applications fail
30
, applicants must convince the
ECO that they are a ‘genuine visitor’. The Home Office guidance on the ‘genuine visitor
test’ allows the political, economic and security situation of the country of application,
or even just the nationality, to be considered.
31
It also allows statistics on immigration
compliance from those in the same geographical region to be considered. This
appears to allow prejudice and unjustified assumptions to come into play when
deciding whether an application is genuine
32
. The inquiry received numerous cases
demonstrating that even small, insignificant discrepancies in the documentary
evidence are used to draw the conclusion that the applicant is not ‘genuine’.
Immigration lawyer, Iain Halliday explained that there appears to be a presumption
that the visitor will abscond, and that proof of previous visits and return to the country
of origin is often not given appropriate weight. The impression gained by many
African applicants from their own experience is that Home Office officials seem to
assume that they will not leave the UK at the end of their visit and that therefore
the decision making scales are automatically weighted in favour of a visa refusal.
33
Further, according to the ICIBI “Since 2015, UKVI has been developing and rolling
out a ‘streaming tool’ that assesses the perceived risks attached to an application.
The streaming tool is regularly updated with data of known immigration abuses…
It streams applications ‘Green’ (low risk), ‘Amber’ (medium risk) or ‘Red’ (high risk).
There is a risk that the streaming tool becomes a de facto decision-making tool.”
34
The ICIBI told the inquiry he was concerned that overreliance on the algorithmic
“streaming” tool could mean that decisions were not being made on the merits of the
individual case but on a set of generalised and detached indicators.
Evidence submitted to the APPG inquiry showed frequent errors in the handling of
30
Iain Halliday of McGill
& Co Solicitors, Written
Evidence to APPG,
January 2019 (See
online Appendix)
31
See page 16 of
guidance here
- https://assets.
publishing.service.
gov.uk/government/
uploads/system/
uploads/attachment_
data/file/793361/Visit-
guidance-v8.0ext.pdf
(Last accessed June
2019)
32
Iain Halliday of McGill
& Co Solicitors, Written
Evidence to APPG,
January 2019 (See
online Appendix)
33
Iain Halliday of McGill
& Co Solicitors, Written
Evidence to APPG,
January 2019 (See
online Appendix)
34
The Independent
Chief Inspector
for Borders and
Immigration, An
Inspection of Entry
Clearance Processing
Operations in Croydon
and Istanbul, July 2017
22 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
applications and inconsistent decision making, depending on the individual decision
maker. While a margin of human error is accepted in most contexts, the rate of
mistakes and inconsistency suggests a systemic failure whereby clearly inaccurate
decisions can be made with no quality assurance or fact-checking. The last global
review of entry clearance decision making was in 2011 and found poor quality decision
making in 35% of cases.
35
Subsequent inspections of the ICIBI have repeatedly raised
concerns relating to decision making quality and there is little to suggest improvement.
3.2 Erroneous issue and refusal notices
The poor level of accuracy and completeness of the visa issue notes and refusal notices
was raised by a number of witnesses and has been a repeated theme in previous
inspection reports of the ICBI. This further suggests that due consideration of individual
circumstances is not taking place. The 2014 inspection found that 42% of refusal notices
were “not balanced, and failed to show that consideration had been given to both
positive and negative evidence.”
38
Further, the 2017 inspection reported that significant
improvements were needed to eliminate factual errors and recommended that
the use of generic issue notes should be stopped as they “fail to reflect the specific
circumstances of individual applications and the reasons for decisions”.
The 2017 inspection sample of Croydon DMC found that of 49 refusal notices, 24 were
unsatisfactory due to factual inaccuracy (e.g. citing lack of documentary evidence
that was in fact included, or confusion over which country the applicant was from)
or inappropriate grounds (e.g. documents being ‘too faint’ when they were clear,
Case Study: Inconsistent decision making
Case studies from CAFOD and London International Festival for Theatre, reported numerous
examples where applications were initially refused but were accepted on a second application,
in spite of the fact that no changes had been made on resubmission.
36
Further, Public Administration International, showed evidence that when almost identical
applications were made by African officials to come on the same training course in London, more
junior staff were granted visas while more senior staff were refused, even though there was no
clear difference in their circumstances or applications.
Councillor Kate Anolue, Deputy Mayor of the London Borough of Enfield, gave oral evidence to
the APPG highlighting her experience of applying for UK visas for her family in Nigeria. Councillor
Anolue said she considers herself to be a good UK citizen having been in the country for over
40 years, working as a midwife and ultimately becoming Mayor of Enfield. She outlined multiple
instances where she has applied for close family members to visit her in the UK and visas have
been rejected. In some instances, applications are granted for several years for an individual
(8 years consecutively), only to be refused in a near identical application in the 9th year.
Councillor Anolue was able to provide assurances for the funding of flights, accommodation and
subsistence, and was frustrated that it is not clear how her only sister could make a successful
application to visit her in the UK after 40 years, to attend her 70th birthday and see her second
Mayoral appointment.
37
35
Independent Chief
Inspector for Borders
and Immigration, Entry
Clearance Decision Making:
A Global Review, June 2011
36
Minute of oral evidence
hearing, 22nd January 2019
(See online Appendix)
37
Minute of oral evidence
hearing, 22nd January 2019
(See online Appendix)
38
Independent Chief
Inspector for Borders and
Immigration, An inspection
of Family Visitor visa
applications, Dec 2014
23 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
or having a “limited body of evidence” to demonstrate a subsisting relationship).
One family reunion application included marriage certificates and passports for the
couple’s four children born over a ten-year period but was still unsuccessful.
39
3.3 Assumptions regarding wealth
Inability to demonstrate that the applicant has sufficient money to pay for the visit is
another common reason for rejection. In the evidence received by the inquiry, it was
often asserted that this results in systemic prejudice against African applicants. The
entry clearance system seems to make little consideration of, or allowances for, the
bureaucratic or cultural context of the country the application is from. For example,
regular banking is not always readily available, individuals may have multiple jobs
or incomes, salary payments may not always follow a strict monthly pattern and in
some circumstances families may habitually pool and share resources in a more fluid
manner. Insisting therefore that every small transaction is accounted for becomes an
impossible burden.
The single most common issue highlighted by those who gave evidence was the
requirement to prove the financial circumstances of the applicant, even where the
visit is fully funded by a credible UK sponsor. The inquiry heard that many applications
were rejected for purely financial reasons (including insufficient/undocumented
income, travel expenses judged not commensurate with personal and financial
circumstances etc) or because of minor discrepancies for unaccounted small
payments. This was regularly the case even when sponsoring agencies and
organisations provided proof that costs would be covered. This is a serious
problem, particularly for those working for religious organisations, NGO activists and
academics, many of whom have low incomes but entirely legitimate reasons to make
short-term visits to the UK for pastoral or professional purposes, including for example
for conferences or public meetings.
42
The inquiry has not seen any compelling evidence to justify an approach which views
a lack of affluence as, in itself, reasonable grounds for declining a visa application. It is
Case study: Inaccurate or careless mistakes in decision-making
The Scotland Malawi Partnership highlighted a case where a high-profile musician invited to the
UK from Malawi was given a visa rejection letter from UKVI which essentially stated: ‘we reject your
visa because [insert reason here]’. The letter had not been completed by UKVI before being sent
to the applicant, with the pro forma advice to the visa assessor about what information should be
included in the letter still visible to the applicant.
40
In 2019, the University of Bradford invited a South Sudanese academic/activist for an event. When
he applied for a visa in Nairobi, his passport was sent back to him with nothing added. Assuming
he had been refused, the event was cancelled, only for him to receive a message a week later
saying they had forgotten to put the visa in the passport and asking him to return his passport to
have the visa inserted.
41
Such incidents are acutely embarrassing and inconvenient for all involved.
39
The Independent Chief
Inspector for Borders and
Immigration, An Inspection of
Entry Clearance Processing
Operations in Croydon and
Istanbul, July 2017
40
Minute of oral evidence
hearing, 22nd January 2019
(See online Appendix)
41
University of Bradford,
Submission to APPGs, June
2019 (See online Appendix)
42
Minute of oral evidence
hearing, 22nd January 2019
(See online Appendix)
24 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
unclear on what basis financial details are required from the applicant if a visit is fully
funded. It is deeply problematic to conflate poverty with presumed criminality without
a clear evidence base.
Many applicants, particularly government ministers, officials and VIP visitors, including
for example a senior African Union Commissioner on his visit to Westminster
parliament in 2018, considered it unreasonable, intrusive and demeaning to be
required to provide such a detailed range of personal data. In a number of cases,
those giving evidence stated that even if a visa is ultimately granted, the process
can be so unpleasant, intrusive and dehumanising, that the purpose of the visit is
undermined because of the loss of goodwill before any travel takes place.
These experiences tend to give rise to an impression that the UK wishes only to grant
visas to wealthy visitors and that the poor need not apply.
Case Study: Too much or too little money
ActionAid highlighted the challenges it has getting young human rights activists to the UK to
speak about their work, often supported by DFID. The most common reason for refusal is income
and bank statements. ActionAid highlighted a fundamental ‘Catch 22’: junior staff do not have
sufficient funds in their personal bank accounts to secure a UK visa and so cannot attend training
and development opportunities in the UK, as a result of which they remain junior staff.
43
CAFOD, the Catholic Agency For Overseas Development, observed a steep increase in the number
of refusals from Africa in the last seven years. They highlighted one refusal from the DRC where a
Priest was denied a visa for not being able to say how much he had in his bank account. Catholic
Priests do not earn an income, so it is deeply questionable, and intrusive to have this requirement
when CAFOD have clearly stated they are covering all costs.
44
Further, CAFOD highlighted that they have had visa rejections both because applicants have
had insufficient funds in their bank accounts but also because they have had too much. If an
applicant has £200 in a bank account but does not explain where these funds have come from
this can be cited as grounds for rejection.
This approach is also a serious challenge for professionals undertaking freelance consultancy
work. For example, a renowned writer invited to speak at Bristol University was rejected due to
small sums for freelance work that despite explaining them in the application were deemed
“untraceable”. This was felt to be a short step away from accusing the applicant, a leader in their
field, of being a fraud.
45
To cite one specific refusal letter, a distinguished female African scholar invited to attend the
ECAS 2019 conference in Edinburgh to present a paper was refused on the grounds quoted below,
even though UKVI acknowledged that the sponsors would fund the trip: “You are self employed
Nigeria [sic] and earn 1500000.00 NGN (£3,199.56) a year. Your GT bank statement has a balance
of 945,188.13 NGN (£2,016.12) on 2
nd
April 2019. The credits and balances in your account are not
consistent with your declared yearly income and I am not satisfied about the origins of the funds
in your bank account. On the evidence before me I am not satisfied that this statement is a true
reflection of your financial circumstances or that your circumstances are as stated. In the light of
43
ActionAid, Written Evidence
Submission to APPGs, January
2019 (See online Appendix)
44
CAFOD, Written Evidence
Submission to APPGs, January
2019 (See online Appendix)
45
Bristol University, Written
Evidence Submission to
APPGs, January 2019 (See
online Appendix)
25 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
3.4 Seeming discrimination
The grounds on which an application can be rejected are often not clear and can
vary enormously, even for a single applicant. This elasticity gives rise to inconsistency,
and to decisions that can be considered discriminatory or prejudiced.
When comparing cases where applicants were refused, ASA-UK found that some
women were asked personal and inappropriate questions when men were not. For
example, women were asked to provide proof of marriage and children, or of owning
property, when men are not.
47
Further, some case studies demonstrated questionable and sometimes offensive
reasons for refusals. ASA-UK’s data found that in some cases, visa officers misread
information in a manner that suggests a failure to grasp significant professional
contexts and work, and which suggests racial prejudice. In one instance, a highly
regarded full Professor, who had been invited to the conference in recognition of his
contribution to ongoing debates, was denied a conference visa because he had not
demonstrated that he had ‘previously’ been sent on similar training in the UK.’ The
assumption that an African academic would only visit the UK to be ‘trained’ was both
offensive and taken to be prejudice.
48
In another example, the London International Festival for Theatre had some Tier
5 applicants refused who were an internationally renowned choreographer and
two dancers from the DRC presenting a performance reflecting on their personal
experience of the civil war. Their visas were refused as the entry clearance officers
could not understand why dancers from the UK could not fill these roles.
49
the above and on the balance of probabilities, I am not satisfied that you are genuinely seeking
entry as a visitor for a limited period not exceeding six months or that you intend to leave the UK
at the end of the visit…”
46
The individual in question had recently travelled to Europe and returned to Nigeria five times
without incident. It is hard not to read such a letter as personally insulting.
46
ECAS Submission to
APPG, June 2019 (See online
Appendix)
47
African Studies Association
UK, Written Evidence
Submission to APPGs, January
2019 (See online Appendix)
48
African Studies Association
UK, Written Evidence
Submission to APPGs, January
2019 (See online Appendix)
49
Minute of oral evidence
hearing, 22nd January 2019
(See online Appendix)
50
Dr Robtel Pailey, Written
Evidence Submission to
APPGs, January 2019 (See
online Appendix)
Case Study: Cost, inefficiency and discrimination
The text used in this case study is quoting verbatim from the original written submission from Dr Pailey to the APPG inquiry.
The full text is available in the report’s online appendix.
Dr. Robtel Neajai Pailey is a Liberian national based at the University of Oxford, who has experience
of applying for different kinds of UK visas (tourist, Tier 4, Tier 2) both from the US (as a permanent US
resident) and Liberia (as a Liberian national) since 2006. She believes that UK immigration processes
for African nationals are ‘discriminatory and meant to humiliate and strip Africans of their dignity.’
50
Dr. Pailey’s first experience applying from the US for a UK visitor visa in 2006 was relatively
smooth although she found that the supporting documents required upfront were intrusive and
cumbersome (confirmed travel itinerary, confirmation of accommodation, health insurance,
26 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
3.5 Lack of procedural fairness
The inquiry also heard of situations where applications were rejected based on an
absence of information not required or suggested under the application guidelines.
Evidence was provided of applications being rejected for not having provided birth
certificates for all the applicant’s children, or because third country documentation
was not valid for a long period post travel. The 2011 report of the former ICIBI, John
Vine, found that 16% of a global sample of applicants were refused entry clearance
for failing to provide information which they could not have been aware of at the time
of submitting their applications.
52
As such, he repeatedly recommended in various
inspections between 2011-2012, that applicants should be told exactly what evidence
is required to be successful. He added that if they have followed guidelines, but the
ECO needs more information to decide, applicants should be able be submit this
evidence before the application is rejected.
53
3-month bank statements, list of countries visited within the past 10 years, with dates, etc), and the
cost of UK visa fees were prohibitive, especially as they are non-refundable if rejected.
However, her last experience applying for a Tier 2 visa from Accra, Ghana, was ‘the absolute worst’.
Not only were the procedures unnecessarily time-consuming, but the costs were ‘akin to extortion’.
In addition to the visa fees, she had to pay an extra fee for a TB test, even though she had taken a
similar test for the same visa application centre a year or two before. She also paid an extra fee
for a ‘Priority Service’, erroneously advertised as a fast-track service, which failed to deliver by the
promised date and forced her to reschedule a trip to Southern Africa at considerable personal
cost in cancellation fees.
While waiting for her passport, she spent countless hours contacting UK Visas and Immigration
(UKVI) via phone and e-mail to ascertain the status of her application (which required
upfront additional payment), and response times were unsatisfactory. There was very little
communication between the UKVI, the UK High Commission in Ghana and the Visa Application
Centre in Accra, and no one could notify her about the whereabouts of her passport even though
she asked for her travel document back before a visa decision was made. While she finally
received her passport after more than three weeks, she submitted a formal complaint in writing
demanding a full refund of the Priority Service fee. Her request was dismissed.
Dr. Pailey believes that her contrasting experience applying from the US and from Africa, having
heard similar stories from other African colleagues and friends, demonstrates discrimination
against those applying from the continent. She is now convinced that UK immigration processes
are deliberately structured to deter and discourage African nationals from applying for and
securing visas, the process being ‘dehumanising, xenophobic and racist’. She believes this bodes
ill for Africa-UK relations after Brexit.
Separately, the African Studies Association UK presented evidence of two forms of discrimination,
firstly against women and secondly on grounds of nationality. On the latter at their most recent
bi-annual conference in 2018, there were 21 documented cases of visa refusals or delays, 15 of
which concerned Nigerians and three Ugandans. This was not representative of the number of
applicants attending the conference from these countries and suggested applicants from Nigeria
and Uganda were being treated more severely than applicants from other African countries.
51
51
African Studies
Association UK, Written
Evidence Submission to
APPG, January 2019 (See
online Appendix)
52
Independent Chief
Inspector for Borders
and Immigration, Entry
Clearance Decision Making:
A Global Review, June 2011
27 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
However, despite both these recommendations being accepted by the Home Office,
54
eight years later evidence strongly suggests that neither recommendation has been
effectively implemented. There is still no clear guidance of what is needed to be
successful - only a list of suggested supporting documents that is not exhaustive
and is only available online in either English or Chinese
55
. Furthermore, applicants who
followed the guidelines still have no opportunity to submit additional evidence to
clarify an issue before a case is rejected.
In the inquiry meeting with the Immigration Minister, the Head of Visa operations
at UKVI, explained that UKVI avoided constraining or burdening applicants with an
exhaustive list of documentation, and claimed that allowing additional information to
be submitted after application would be a huge undertaking for which UKVI did not
have the capacity. He added that it is usually faster to pay again and re-apply with
the missing information, despite this involving additional expense for applicants who
may have been unjustifiably refused
56
. The inquiry found that there was still confusion
around what is required for a successful application and that this lack of clarity made
the system opaque and unfair while increasing the chances of a rejection.
3.6 No right of appeal and weak quality control
Despite many years of independent evidence showing alarmingly high levels of
errors and inconsistency in decision making, there is no right of appeal or redress
for applicants. Many who gave evidence felt the seemingly irrational decisions
they experienced were largely due to an absence of sufficient oversight and
scrutiny, which has allowed poor quality decision-making to become institutionally
acceptable. In practice there appears to be no sanction on an individual, or the
system, for inaccurate or inconsistent decisions.
Firstly, internal mechanisms seem weak and superficial
58
. Secondly, there is no
external quality control; and thirdly there is no right of appeal for refusal of a visit visa
application. The only formal way to overturn a refusal is an expensive and lengthy
judicial review, for which most applicants have neither the time nor the resources.
Without a mechanism to challenge decisions, the lack of oversight and accountability
is aggravated.
Such is the seeming randomness of decision-making that many organisations that
sponsor or support large numbers of applications have learnt through experience
that it is often more fruitful to simply apply again, paying the fees for a second time,
than to try and challenge a decision.
Case Study: Inadequate Guidance
ASA-UK reported cases where academics were denied a visa because it was judged that the
conference expenses were not commensurate with their financial circumstances, although there
is no guidance as to what threshold is used to judge this. If visa officers can reject applications on
this basis, it should be stated clearly on UK and local visa websites what percentage of resources/
annual income is considered reasonable expenditure for a trip.
57
53
The Independent Chief
Inspector for Borders and
Immigration, A Comparative
Inspection of the UK Borders
Agency visas sections
that process applications
submitted in Africa: Nairobi,
Abuja, Pretoria and the UK
Visa Section, July 2011 &
Independent Chief Inspector
for Borders and Immigration,
Entry Clearance Decision
Making: A Global Review,
June 2011
54
Home Office, Response
to ICIBI inspection into Visa
Sections in Africa, July 2011
& Home Office, Response
to ICIBI Entry Clearance
Decision Making: A global
review, July 2011
55
UKVI, ‘Visit Visa: Guide to
Supporting Documents’, 1
September 2016
56
Hope-Jones, D & Bailey, H,
Short minutes of APPG Africa
meeting with Rt. Hon. Caroline
Nokes MP, 13th February 2019
(See online Appendix)
57
African Studies Association
UK, Written Evidence
Submission to APPG, January
2019 (See online Appendix)
58
The Independent Chief
Inspector for Borders and
Immigration, An Inspection
of Entry Clearance
Processing Operations in
Croydon and Istanbul, July
2017
28 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
3.7 Under-resourcing of staff
Introducing a robust internal quality checking mechanism was repeatedly
recommended as urgent in the ICIBI 2011 global review
59
and was accepted by the
Home Office
60
, however, our inquiry submissions and evidence from subsequent
ICIBI reports demonstrates that a robust mechanism across UKVI has not been
effectively implemented. The 2017 inspection of Croydon DMC found that “first-line
quality assurance of decisions and decision notices needed to improve, especially at
Croydon DMC” and “that staffing levels across DMCs were consistently too low and
that persistent under-resourcing was acute at the ECM grade.”
61
Persistent under-resourcing means ECMs are overstretched and unable to provide
the individual decision makers (ECOs) with meaningful feedback to learn from their
mistakes. ECOs are therefore not held accountable for poor quality decisions. One
ECO told inspectors “I’ve never had any feedback, so I assume that all my decisions
are correct”. The Immigration Minister confirmed that ECOs attend a 8-10 day training
course, however whilst there are learning objectives and individual logs, new ECOs do
not undergo any formal assessment before taking up their posts.
62
Further agency
staff, with less experience and minimal training, are brought in to make up minimum
ECO numbers and temporary promotions are made from ECO to ECM grade to ensure
minimum levels are met.
63
We judge that under-resourcing of ECMs coupled with high
turnover of ECOs was one of the main causes of poor quality decision making.
Further, due to insufficient time for administration allowed to ECOs, the non-
retention of documents (copies) on file that were relied upon to make the entry
clearance decisions was raised as a concern across inspected DMCs in both 2011
inspections and in 2017. Once again, despite the Home Office accepting previous
recommendations to improve this
64
, Croydon DMC was unable to locate 21 of the 160
Croydon files requested for sampling in the 2017 inspection. This further compounds
the inability to deliver proper quality assurance.
65
Although not set at the Ministerial level, the benchmarks for the number of applications
an ECO was expected to complete each day further undermines decision making
quality. The 2017 ICIBI inspection found benchmarks in place at all DMCs inspected. In
Istanbul the daily average was 137 decisions made per ECO - allowing approximately 3
minutes per decision, which even for an experienced decision maker allows little time
for careful consideration of the evidence. The inspector shared concerns that similar
practices and pressures are in place across all DMCs and is having an impact on the
quality of decision making.
66
In a recent letter to the inquiry, the Immigration Minister
confirmed that “ECOs have targets only on general productivity. There are no targets or
expectations on the number of refusals any ECO must make” but did not elaborate on
how these daily targets are set or reviewed.
67
To understand better the ratio of decisions to staff, our inquiry endeavoured to find
out the number of full time Entry Clearance Managers and Entry Clearance Officers
employed within the UKVI network pertaining to Africa. However, following a written PQ
from April 2019, the Home Office declined to provide data on the number of ECOs and
ECMs employed in its centres
68
. The fact that the Home Office are deliberately opaque
about their capacity to deal with such high volumes, is another cause for concern.
59
The Independent Chief
Inspector for Borders and
Immigration, A Comparative
Inspection of the UK Borders
Agency visas sections
that process applications
submitted in Africa: Nairobi,
Abuja, Pretoria and the UK
Visa Section, July 2011 &
Independent Chief Inspector
for Borders and Immigration,
Entry Clearance Decision
Making: A Global Review,
June 2011
60
Home Office, Response
to ICIBI inspection into Visa
Sections in Africa, July 2011
& Home Office, Response
to ICIBI Entry Clearance
Decision Making: A global
review, July 2011
61
The Independent Chief
Inspector for Borders and
Immigration, An Inspection of
Entry Clearance Processing
Operations in Croydon and
Istanbul, July 2017
62
The Rt. Hon. Caroline Nokes
MP, Minister of State for
Immigration, Letter to Chi
Onwurah MP 4th June 2019
(See online Appendix)
63
The Independent Chief
Inspector for Borders and
Immigration, An Inspection of
Entry Clearance Processing
Operations in Croydon and
Istanbul, July 2017
64
Home Office, Response
to ICIBI inspection into Visa
Sections in Africa, July 2011
& Home Office, Response
to ICIBI Entry Clearance
Decision Making: A global
review, July 2011
65
The Independent Chief
Inspector for Borders and
Immigration, An Inspection of
Entry Clearance Processing
Operations in Croydon and
Istanbul, July 2017
66
The Independent Chief
Inspector for Borders and
Immigration, An Inspection
of Entry Clearance
Processing Operations in
Croydon and Istanbul, July
2017
67
The Rt. Hon. Caroline Nokes
MP, Letter to Chi Onwurah
MP, 4th June 2019 (See online
Appendix)
68
House of Commons,
‘Written Question: Entry
Clearances’, 11 April 2019,
244085
29 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
We understand that there is a high demand for visas from Africa; we understand that
there are resource constraints on Government. But if it is Government policy to have
a strict and demanding visa regime, the Government needs to provide the resources
necessary to deliver that efficiently if Britain’s global reputation is not to suffer.
3.8 The role of the Chief Inspector for Borders and Immigration
It is clear that the only real oversight of the system is the Independent Chief Inspector
for Borders and Immigration who on average completes 15 inspections a year, one
or two of which might relate specifically to visas. ICIBI inquiries over the past decade
have repeatedly raised the alarm over poor-quality decision making and unfairness
in the system and called for improved internal quality assurance, procedural fairness
and increasing the capacity of first line management. The current ICIBI David Bolt and
the former Inspector John Vine both expressed frustration to the APPGs that despite
their recommendations for improvement being accepted by the Home Office, things
rarely change, even after re-inspections.
The ICIBI’s reports and recommendations are addressed to the Home Secretary and
laid in Parliament (which is largely seen as administrative). The Home Office provides
a response where recommendations are either accepted in whole, accepted
partially, or not accepted at all. The report and the Home Office response are
published online. However, the ICIBI is not a regulator and has no power to compel
the Home Office. David Bolt said on reinspection, issues considered dealt with by
the Home Office are often found to persist and the problem is unchanged. Without
sustained public and parliamentary interest and oversight, it appears that very little
will change or improve.
3.9 Response and remedy
In the past year, a number of academic, arts and business bodies have begun to alert
UKVI and British missions overseas to particular events in the UK – conferences, arts
festivals etc – for which African academics and artists are being invited. On occasions
they have also raised specific cases where a visa has been delayed or refused. In
some of these cases, this appears to have helped reduce the number of rejections for
example, ASAUK conference in 2018 as compared to the 2016 ASAUK conference. But this
is a very labour intensive process for the inviting bodies and for UKVI, and it will be more
efficient for all parties to avoid the problem arising in the first place.
Case Study: Action to ameliorate unjustified rejection
Following the successful efforts to reduce the number of rejections at the ASAUK conference in
2018, the organisers of the European Conference on African Studies in Edinburgh in June 2019 not
only made a full list of incoming African invitees available to the Home Office, but, with the support
of the Royal African Society, made direct contact with senior Home Office officials who were able
to overturn 10 of the 18 rejections that had nevertheless been issued. This was immensely helpful,
but did require personal intervention at senior level for the problem to be remedied.
69
69
ECAS Submission to
APPG, June 2019 (See online
Appendix)
30 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
Director Rama Thiaw, Film Africa 2016. Image by Ivan Gonzalez
Gaylene Gould and Blitz the Ambassador. Image by Amifel Cliff-Eribo
Similarly, headline guests for Film Africa’s 2016 Gala Opening, Senegalese hip-hop duo Keur Gui
had their visas refused but overturned following intervention by the then High Commissioner.
Unfortunately, the visa decision was overturned too late for them to make it to London for what
would have been their debut UK performance.
An additional example of helpful amelioration by UKVI in its relationship with the Scotland Malawi
Partnership is given below in section 4.5.
31 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
Section 4
It is undoubtedly true that the UK greatly benefits from its close ties with Africa, a
continent of growth and opportunity and very possibly the next century’s economic
growth powerhouse. By 2030 one in five people will be African
70
.
Across business, trade, healthcare, education and academia, two-way exchange
between the UK and Africa is leveraging strong mutual benefit. Britain’s diplomatic
standing with the countries of Africa is underpinned by generations of civic and
associational links, and an active and engaged diaspora population. Behind every
nation-to-nation relationship are myriad people-to-people friendships; these are
central to the UK’s standing in Africa. The benefits of such internationalism resonate
through society in many and varied ways but, too often, can be lost from sight or
taken for granted.
For each visit, whether of a UK national to Africa or an African to the UK, new
opportunities for collaboration are explored and we strengthen our sense of mutual
understanding and respect. These are the essential two-way flows which must
underpin Global Britain.
In this section, we draw out the impact that visa denials for African visitors are having
on the UK’s own interests. We explore what happens when these essential flows stop,
or are significantly impeded. We consider UK interests in the broadest terms to include
commercial interests, diplomacy, and academic and cultural reputation. Whilst it is
difficult to accurately quantify the damage done to the UK by a visa system that is
manifestly unfit for purpose, our report contains concrete examples where harm has
been done and costs unnecessarily incurred in both monetary and reputational terms.
4.1 Business, trade and investment
The submissions made to us from the commercial and business sectors are vocal
and explicit about the harm being done by the current UK visa regime. We heard
that the system is harming the private sector’s immediate efforts to do business
and also threatening its work in the long term. An expensive, time consuming and
intrusive application process which does not result in rational decision making is a
threat to the UK’s long-term commercial interests. The inability to trace the stage
which an application had reached caused uncertainty and costly delays to business.
Submissions pointed out that the current visa regime hinders the Government’s wider
efforts to promote the UK as the best place in the world to do business after Brexit.
We did hear of major companies doing multi-million pound contracts with African
governments who were able through their direct intervention with Government
departments to ensure that all African partners they were inviting to the UK received
the desired visas promptly. But this itself indicates that without such direct influence
Impact on UK interests
70
UNICEF analysis based on
United Nations, Department
of Economic and Social
Affairs, Population Division,
World Population Prospects:
The 2012 Revision (UN WPP),
United Nations, New York, 2013
32 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
there may indeed have been problems, and many smaller businesses wanting to
do business with Africa have neither the Government contacts nor the resources
to invest in ensuring a smooth visa process for their African partners. The current
problems therefore discriminate more heavily against small and medium-sized
enterprises trying to expand their business in Africa.
Case Studies: Impact on business
Major UK companies, such as oil companies, tend to have good high-level contacts with British
Ministers which helps them ensure their African partners can obtain UK visit visas. But even a large
company such as De La Rue reported problems and delays caused by visa refusals. The Regional
Director for Africa at De La Rue, informed the APPGs that his company provides around 40 letters
of sponsorship for visa applications from Africa each year. Recently, a whole delegation that De
La Rue had invited from Somalia had their visas rejected on the grounds that they submitted
inadequate information and the assessor did not believe the credentials. On this occasion, the
assessor actually phoned from the DMC in South Africa to ask if this application was legitimate,
and asked for the letter to be re-worded to say the company will ensure the delegation will
return at the end of their visit. But the business opportunity was lost. De La Rue now work with the
Department for International Trade (DIT) to submit a letter as part of each UK visa application and
coordinate with the local British High Commission or Embassy. But even British Missions often have
difficulty getting information on the status of visa applications once submitted.
71
Public Administration International (PAI) is an independent company based in London that
employs seven staff and provides short training courses in a range of aspects of public
administration and institutional strengthening to government bodies and departments. It is an
accredited short course provider by the British Accreditation Council for Independent Further and
Higher Education. Many of their clients are high-level officials from African countries and PAI have
been tracking the impact of visa refusals on the attendance at their courses and consequently
on their revenue. As a direct consequence of visa refusals and delays, in 2018, PAI reported a
total revenue loss of £33,025 and in 2019 (between March-November) a loss of £29,200. Predicted
workshop revenue in that period was £56,000, which means that over half of that revenue has
been lost due to prospective participants not receiving their visas. PAI have said they have noticed
a rapid increase in the number of visa refusal over the past two years and are concerned about
the future of their training programme as many of their regular clients have told them they now
prefer to travel to the US or even Italy for training courses due solely to the difficulty of obtaining a
visit visa for the UK.
72
Another UK company informed us that it had ceased to invite African partners for meetings in the
UK as the risk of refusal or delay was so high. They now travelled to Paris to hold their meetings
there - an inconvenience for them, and a loss to the British economy.
Similarly, AFFORD-UK and the Karma Kola foundation have both found that it is risky to organise
training and events for African (and diaspora) entrepreneurs in the UK. Since 2015, when a number
of African speakers invited to attend an event at Europe House were denied visas, AFFORD has
increasingly sought to organise such events in Brussels or elsewhere in the Schengen Zone to
reduce risk of visa applications being rejected . Likewise, Karma Cola UK previously invited and
supported African entrepreneurs to attend training (organised by DFID), only to find their visa
71
Minute of oral evidence
hearing, 22nd January 2019
(See online Appendix)
72
Public Administration
International, Written
evidence to APPGs, June
2019 (See online Appendix)
33 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
4.2 Government Relations
We received evidence of government officials refused visas despite travelling on
official business and despite significant interventions by UK-based colleagues in
government. Distinguished officials and their personal assistants have been refused
visas despite their application being submitted with an official government letter.
Submissions pointed out that in this scenario the personal account details of the
applicant are irrelevant but have been provided as grounds for refusal.
Even speakers invited to participate in UK Government supported events have
encountered significant barriers in applying.
Worryingly, a number of foreign governments made representation during the inquiry,
highlighting the impact the UK visa system was having on their governments’ work
in with the UK. This included oral evidence from the Ghanaian and Ugandan High
Commissions’, the Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Mauritania
76
, the Tunisian
Ambassador and the Malawi High Commission. In each case, these governments
spoke of how even government officials were often unable to secure a UK visa when
travelling on official business. The case studies in Section 2.1 give further examples of
the damage done to governmental relations as a result of UK visa policy.
This all leaves a particularly damaging impression on African partner governments.
applications rejected; for this reason they increasingly organise such events in Belgium or the
Netherlands.
Further, the Unesco chair in refugee integration, has recently said she will no longer host any
international conferences in the UK because of the Home Office’s “inept”, “embarrassing” and
“discriminatory” visitor visa system.
73
Case Study: Impact on British Government work
A women’s rights activist from Liberia, working with ActionAid, was personally invited by DFID to speak
at the Family Planning Summit in 2017, accompanied by an ActionAid Liberia staff member. This
necessitated travel to Accra, Ghana to make the applications, incurring costs and inconvenience.
There were significant delays in receiving a decision from the visa issuing centre and, in the event,
DFID staff in the UK had to become involved to support the application. Despite this, the visa was
not granted in time and she was not able to attend. This barrier to women from the global South
participating equally in international events was cited as a significant harm caused.
74
We heard further evidence of a visit funded through a grant from the Welsh Government as part
of its ‘Wales for Africa’ grant scheme. The applicant had visited Wales several times previously and
letters of support were provided by Montgomery Federation of Young Farmers Clubs, Fair Trade
Wales and the Welsh Government. The MPs Jo Stevens and Glyn Davies intervened to have the
visa refusal overturned but this took place too late for the producer to be able to participate in
Fairtrade Fortnight events.
75
73
Amelia Hill, Unesco chair
blasts “discriminatory” UK
visitor visa system , The
Guardian, 24th June 2019
(https://www.theguardian.
com/uk-news/2019/jun/24/
unesco-chair-blasts-
discriminatory-uk-visitor-
visa-system?CMP=Share_
iOSApp_Other- last
accessed June 2019)
74
ActionAid, Written evidence
to APPGs, January 2019 (See
online Appendix)
75
FairTrade Foundation,
Letter for Rt. Hon. Caroline
Nokes MP, 11th April 2019 (See
online Appendix)
76
Minute of oral evidence
hearing, 22nd January 2019
(See online Appendix)
34 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
4.3 Incoherence in Cross-Departmental Working
There appears to be a lack of coherent, efficient and effective cross-department
working between UKVI and other government departments (OGDs). In its recent
report published in January 2019, the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and
Immigration found no evidence of an overarching Home Office Borders, Immigration
and Citizenship Service (BICS) strategy for collaborative working with OGDs. The
report focused on the UKVI’s work with four OGDs: the Department for Work and
Pensions; Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs; Department for Education; and
Department of Health and Social Care. The report noted that the Home Office ‘had
no means of assessing, or even articulating, the overall value BICS derived from OGD
collaborations.’ The ICBI further noted that there was little understanding on the part
of the Home Office of what value it could gain from working closely with OGDs.
77
According to the report, BICS had developed no way of highlighting when an OGD
was reliant on the Home Office to deliver its department’s objectives. The approach
taken has been piecemeal and informal with little ministerial or senior level support
for collaboration. Inquiry correspondence with the Foreign Secretary, confirmed
that the approach to UKVI-FCO collaboration was piecemeal and unclear, with a
lack of ministerial leadership.
78
The ICIBI report urged the Home Office to review and
enhance the support it provides and our investigation would add that this needs to
be ministerially led.
77
The Independent Chief
Inspector for Borders and
Immigration, An inspection
of Home Office (Borders,
Immigration and Citizenship
System) collaborative
working with other
government departments
and agencies, January 2019
78
The Rt. Hon. Jeremy Hunt
MP, Secretary of State for
Foreign Affairs, Letter to Chi
Onwurah MP, 16th April 2019
(online Appendix)
Action Aid photo of Sadia Abdi, Country Director of ActionAid Somaliland in London at a march in July 2018.
35 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
4.4 Academic Exchange
The significant harm done to prestigious academic meetings as a result of visa
difficulties and denials has received recent press attention (see page 45), illustrated
by the case studies below.
Evidence collected by the African Studies Association UK from its biennial conferences
in 2016 and 2018 also shows significant damage to prestigious and high-profile
academic events in the UK. We have already cited above some of the problems that
rejection letters cause, but the questioning of delegates’ qualifications or motives for
attending a conference or giving a lecture tends to rebound not just on the British
Government but on the academic institution hosting the event. In practice these
rejections cause reputational harm to British academic institutions, with African
colleagues increasingly reluctant to apply to attend events in the UK when faced with
apparently irrational decision-making and perceived hostility in the visa system. The
UK’s reputation as a centre of scholarly excellence is damaged by the reasoning often
given for rejection, which too often demonstrates a patronising lack of understanding
of the status and achievements of African colleagues.
Case Study: DFID Partners
Search for Common Ground works to build long-term peace in 49 countries and the charity’s
Annual Common Ground Awards aim to highlight the impact of the UK Department for
International Development (DFID) funding for peacebuilding work around the world. In June 2018,
Search awarded two individuals from Sierra Leone and the Democratic Republic of Congo for their
peacebuilding work. Neither of the Awardees, nor Search staff, (including a Country Director from
Sierra Leone) were given visas to come to London to receive their Awards citing a risk they would
pose a financial burden to the UK. This is despite showing proof of salary and income and Search
being willing sponsors of the visit.
79
Similarly, BOND reported that in the past two years, of 15 African nationals invited to attend
BOND events either as speakers or participants: 5 were successful and 10 were rejected despite
support from BOND. Failure to grant visas to African nationals means that their voices are lost
from important debates about the future of international development and implementation
of the Sustainable Development Goals taking place here in the UK. Ensuring discussion around
international development is both inclusive and diverse, something which DFID strongly supports,
is made harder by the refusal to grant visitor visas to citizens from other countries, who bring
with them a wealth of experience and fresh perspectives in the key issues shaping international
development today.
80
Case Studies: Impact on the UK academic sector
The African Studies Association UK has given a detailed account of the scale of the challenge
of securing UK visas for African participants in recent academic conferences. By great effort on
79
Search for Common
Ground, Written evidence
to APPGs, January 2019 (See
online Appendix)
80
BOND, Written evidence
to APPGs, January 2019 (See
online Appendix)
36 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
4.5 Cultural Exchange
The UK prides itself on being a global centre for the arts and culture, and many
people visit the UK to take advantage of the wealth of talent attracted to perform
here. This depends, however, on the British cultural organisations being able to bring
the best from around the world, including from Africa. The inquiry received evidence
from a number of major cultural festivals, including the Edinburgh Festival, that
their efforts to do this were explicitly hampered by visa problems encountered by a
number of African artists. Again, significant harm was being done to cultural relations
the part of the ASAUK and RAS the rate of rejections has been reduced; but for one of the largest
and most prestigious conferences on African studies in the world, it does damage to both British
national and academic reputations that the problem of rejections for bona fide invitees persist.
In a case recently reported in the Guardian and Observer newspapers in June 2019, Oxfam
highlighted to the inquiry that only one of the 25 individuals from Africa expected to attend a
blog-writing training workshop at the LSE’s recent Africa Summit, were able to do so because of
visa rejections.
81
Specific examples of the harm done to UK research and leadership in tropical medicine from visa
refusals were provided, in addition to those reported last year by the Wellcome Trust.
82
The 2018 Global Health Conference hosted by the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine
(LSHTM) in London in November 2018 aimed to highlight emerging and established women
leaders in global health and support the advancement of women in all forms of leadership from
local communities to global organisations. It brought together 800 established and emerging
leaders with diverse professional and cultural backgrounds including high-level participants
from governments, international organisations, business, academia and NGOs. LSHTM reported
to us that 19 speakers and delegates from low-and middle-income countries in Africa and Asia
were denied visas to enter the United Kingdom for the 2-day conference. The most common
reasons for the visa denials included not being able to demonstrate sufficient funds to support
their (short) stay in the UK and candidates being deemed as not being able to justify through
their personal or professional circumstances that they were visiting the UK as genuine visitors for
the conference. The LSHTM were deprived of the opportunity to foster important and impactful
academic networks through their conference as a result of these visa denials.
83
Esther Yei-Mokuwa, a health researcher focusing on Ebola, highlighted the difficulties scientists in
Africa are facing to be able to participate in international research on protection from infectious
diseases, much of which takes place in the UK. Britain is frustrating this work by not granting visas
to scientists, especially those from Africa.
84
In May 2019, an international team of medical researchers was due to meet in the UK to discuss
their data and to plan preparedness for future pandemics. But African researchers involved in two
projects on epidemics were denied visas. At the time of writing, every single African citizen who
requested a visa as part of this work has been denied, according to the organisers and funders.
These applicants paid initial visa fees but then were denied, despite extensive documentation
from their institutions.
85
81
Harriet Grant,
‘Prejudiced’ Home
Office refusing visas to
African researchers, The
Observer, 8th June 2019,
Front Page
82
Mathew Weaver, UK’s
science reputation ‘at risk
if academic visa issue not
resolved.’ The Guardian,
22nd October 2018
83
LHSTM, Written evidence
to APPGs, January 2019
(See online Appendix)
37 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
by a lack of understanding of the nuances of cultural exchange. This is encapsulated
in the submission of a high-profile dance festival in the UK which was asked why it
was seeking to bring an African dancer to the UK and had not found a UK dancer to
fill this role (see case study below). As well as the damage to the UK’s reputation as a
world leading centre for culture and the arts, individual festivals could lose thousands
of pounds when this happens.
Case Study: Impact in the cultural sector
John Davis and Carolyn Forsyth, Senior Producers at the London International Festival of Theatre
(LIFT) gave compelling oral evidence to the inquiry. They highlighted two identical applications they
have recently made, for dancers from the Congo that have been touring the world for over fifteen
years. One was refused, the other was granted; with no clear sense why this was the case.
They commented that it felt like the visa assessors had not read the application because it quite
clearly stated that this production was about these dancers sharing their personal experiences of
the civil war, and yet they were asked why they hadn’t simply recruited dancers from the UK. A Tier
5 appeal was made but this takes 28 days and you cannot add any new information, it just goes to
a new assessor.
86
The Edinburgh Festival in 2018 made public its concern that a number of invitees to perform or
present their books there had been refused visas on grounds that seemed discriminatory.
87
Promotional image of In Search of Dinozord by Faustin Linyekula / Studios Kabako, presented at The Place during LIFT 2018.
Photographer, Agathe Poupeney
84
Ibid
85
Ibid
86
Minute of oral evidence
hearing, 22nd January 2019
(See online Appendix)
87
Sian Cain, Home Office
refuses visas for authors
invited to Edinburgh Book
Festival, The Guardian, 8th
August 2018
38 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
4.6 People-to-people links
One of the traditional strengths of the UK’s relations with Africa has been in the many
individual links between communities in the UK and on the continent. These often
follow personal contacts made during study or travel, and involve many small, local
NGOs, charities, voluntary or church groups. Regular personal contact is essential to
enable the relationships to remain active and flourish. We received evidence that,
while it was usually no problem for British citizens to visit their African counterparts,
it is increasingly difficult for Africans to make the return visits to the UK, even when
supported by local British communities or organisations, or even funded by HMG.
Many people-to-people and community-to-community links exist on a purely
goodwill basis, underpinned by mutual trust and understanding, and long term
friendships. They are often framed around a shared goal of reducing poverty, and
mitigating the worst effects of poverty, through two-way dignified partnerships. In
the vast majority of cases, visits from the African partner to the UK are fully funded
by the UK partner. Into this context, the requirement for all those travelling from Africa
to provide three months worth of bank statements, wage slips and letters from
employers is especially toxic.
As many churches, schools, charities, diaspora associations and other community
groups have told the inquiry, their partners are suffering extreme poverty and this, to
a large extent, is why the partnership exists. The blurring of poverty with presumed
criminality is deeply harmful to these relationships and the spirit of dignified
partnership they rely on.
Rejecting an African priest or primary school teacher for not having enough funds in
their bank account not to abscond leads to a feeling of imbalance and discrimination
in the relationship, it makes links harder to sustain, and it damages the UK’s reputation
for fair play and giving a warm welcome to foreign citizens.
Scotland Malawi Partnership. Image of Vera Kamtukule, Chief Executive of the Malawi Scotland Partnership visiting Scotland for the first
time in 2017.
39 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
Case Study: Practical impact on community contacts: the Scotland Malawi Partnership
Representing 1,200 different civic links between Scotland and Malawi, engaging 109,000 Scots
annually, the Scotland Malawi Partnership (SMP) gave written and oral evidence highlighting the
serious negative impact of UK visa processing policy. Such civic links, whether through churches,
schools, NGOs, businesses, universities, colleges, hospitals or health clinics, are people-to-people
partnerships, underpinned by a spirit of mutual trust and understanding. They are undermined
when individuals, invited to the UK by their Scottish partners, are treated in an inhumane manner
by a system which pays scant regard for customer experience or even, seemingly, the quality of
decision-making.
88
Asking for three months of bank statements is the single most damaging element of the process.
These are links which aim to fight extreme poverty through friendship and human solidarity.
Asking the partners to prove their affluence conflates poverty with presumed criminality. This
is both morally and conceptually flawed. There is no evidence to suggest that the poorer an
individual, the more likely he or she will abscond. It does tremendous damage to civic links but
adds little or nothing to the quality of decision-making.
While the SMP believes the policy and principle underpinning UK visa issuing is fundamentally
flawed, and does tremendous damage to civic links, it recognises that good systems have been
established by UKVI for the SMP to be able to support individual applications directly at the VAC
and visa processing hub. UKVI has invested in the relationship with the SMP and takes seriously
applications supported by the SMP. This helps both the SMP and UKVI, as it helps UKVI identify
low-risk applications, saving them time and capacity.
While such systems are only available for a relatively small number of applicants (members of
the SMP who seek assistance from the outset), it does present a compelling model for UKVI to
follow elsewhere. Investing time in stakeholder engagement, understanding the key networks
in the UK, and establishing direct communication channels of trust and mutual understanding,
ultimately increases the quality of decision-making and decreases the time required to assess
low-risk applications.
88
Scotland Malawi
Partnership, Written
evidence to APPGs, January
2019 (See online Appendix)
40 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
Many of those who gave
evidence felt UKVI’s systems in
Africa did not aspire to make
the best possible decisions but
rather looked to place ever more
barriers and impediments in
the way of applicants, in order
to deliberately decrease the
number of applications received
as more and more people are
put off visiting the UK.
“
”
41 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
Section 5
Conclusions &
Recommendations
5.1 Conclusions
Over a period of seven months, this joint APPG inquiry has collected evidence from
a diverse range of key stakeholders who have experience engaging the UK’s visa
systems for those applying from Africa. The majority of those who gave evidence
were credible and respected UK-based organisations and individuals, who regularly
invite partners in Africa to the UK as part of longstanding and valuable work across
business, trade, charity, culture and the arts. We have also received extensive,
powerful personal testimony from individuals from diaspora communities and
representatives of African governments, based in the UK.
The public hearing in January was over-subscribed, with every seat occupied by
a different individual keen to share their own experience of engaging the UK visa
system. So strong was the desire from the audience to share their personal stories,
that MPs and Peers co-chairing these sessions had to change the agreed format to
give time for as many as possible in the audience to share their experience. This is
captured in the minutes of this meeting.
89
There was a striking similarity of views between the diverse range of organisations
and individuals represented. Almost everyone spoke, in one way or another, of what
appeared to be a dysfunctional UKVI system, divorced from the realities of Africa;
they spoke of the frustration they and their partners in Africa felt as they navigated
the system; they highlighted the unreasonable evidential requirements and the
frequency of simple and avoidable errors; and they highlighted the lasting negative
impact the experience of applying for a visa was having.
While encapsulating and verifying the frustration that emerged through the inquiry,
the report also puts forward tangible and achievable recommendations which we
feel could help UKVI respond to these concerns.
The inquiry finds that the logistical burdens and inconvenience imposed on visa
applicants, together with the erratic nature of decision making and the reasons given
for rejection of visa applications, does significant damage to the UK’s own interests.
It hinders business partnerships, cultural and personal exchanges, damages inter-
governmental relations and even undermines efforts to showcase the impact of UK
Aid and of international peacebuilding work funded by the UK. It is undermining the
work of the Department for International Trade, the Foreign and Commonwealth
Office and the Department for International Development, as well as what thousands
of UK civic groups are doing.
89
Minute of oral evidence
hearing, 22nd January 2019
(See online Appendix)
42 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
The UK cannot be an outward-looking nation, it cannot be ‘open for business’ without
improving the systems that allow access to people.
The contrast between the reality of how those from Africa are treated as they
navigate the UK visa system and the UK Government’s narrative of a post-Brexit
‘Global Britain’ is sobering. Global Britain cannot and will not be a reality until the
current problems can be resolved.
We recognise the need for effective visa systems to ensure managed migration
and to keep specific individuals out of the UK. This requires quality decision-making.
However, at present, evidence suggests systems are not designed to find the best
balance between quality of decision-making, cost effectiveness and customer
experience. The inquiry has seen repeated examples where the reality on the ground
is a system which fails on all three of these measures.
UKVI seems to lack any meaningful customer feedback systems. This, combined
with the absence of a right of appeal for visitor visas, means there is worryingly little
learning and development, and very limited accountability. Reference is frequently
made, both in the discussions the inquiry had with senior officials and in previous
Parliamentary debates, of the UK having a world-leading visa system and that
strategic shifts such as network consolidation are enhancing the user experience, but
there is little or no evidence in our inquiry to back-up such assertions.
Many of the findings of this inquiry have already been highlighted over a
number of years by the Independent Chief Inspector. While in many cases their
recommendations have been accepted by HMG, there is very limited evidence that
this has led to any significant improvement in the customer experience for African
applicants, which continues to be costly, erratic and unsatisfactory.
We fear many of the most damaging elements of the visa processing system
highlighted in this report add little or nothing to the quality of the decision-making:
many feel they at best show contempt for applicants and at worse expose real
prejudice. Without compelling evidence, for example, that the poorer an applicant
is the more likely they will abscond, asking for bank statements and evidence of
affluence will not reduce overstays. Similarly, the decision to courier all personal
documentation across the continent just to be scanned in by the same private
company that sends them, with HMG never actually seeing the physical documents,
adds nothing to decision-making, increases costs, slows the process and makes the
system in every way worse for the applicant.
Many of those who gave evidence felt UKVI’s systems in Africa did not aspire to
make the best possible decisions but rather looked to place ever more barriers and
impediments in the way of applicants, in order to deliberately decrease the number
of applications received as more and more people are put off visiting the UK.
Without effective feedback systems to understand the damage being done to UK
Plc, this crude policy which deters all from applying, and which is broadly akin to the
‘hostile environment’ established in the UK, might be seen to be working. The more
damage that is done to the UK’s reputation, the fewer people wish to visit, the fewer
visa applications are received, and the more manageable, this process seems. It is
43 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
the job of parliament to listen to, and represent, those who are seeing the damage
done to Global Britain, and ensure that HMG moves to a more intelligent, evidence-
driven and human-centred system.
In part, as a number of contributors identified, the issue is that the current visa system
was never designed to function as it does. It has been added to and amended, too
often for political rather than practical reasons, and the result is a system which
satisfies no one. It does not afford quality decision-making, there is no evidence that
it is cost effective, and it is doing tremendous damage to the image and interests of
Global Britain.
One powerful contribution in the evidence session highlighted the fundamental
lack of dignity, respect, parity and self-awareness in the processes, asking whether
anyone in the UK would accept an invitation to a country in Africa if they had to
first travel across the UK in person to submit biometric data and give to a private
company their passport, birth certificate and marriage certificate, and those of their
immediate family members, three months of bank statements, wage slips and a letter
from their employer. For these items to be posted across the continent to the same
private company in a third country thousands of miles away, just to be scanned
in and held until completion; to pay the equivalent of 2-3 months of the average
national wage, for someone to spend just three minutes assessing the application
with inevitable errors and inconsistencies, but with no recourse to appeal or refund.
If we would not entertain the idea of ourselves navigating such a system, we cannot
expect this system to succeed in supporting our shared vision for an outward-looking,
Global Britain.
Public outcry against the handling of the Windrush scandal in 2018 seems to mark
the beginning of a shift in public attitudes towards migration. There is still, for many,
a serious concern about the levels of net immigration into the UK. But, for most, there
is an increased awareness of the different forms of migration and the need for a
human-centred approach. The ‘hostile environment’ policy, which looked to make life
as difficult as possible for, seemingly, as many as possible, has now been discredited.
It is essential that the same toxic assumptions and apparent prejudices are also
taken out of the visa application system.
There is increasing public interest
90
in this area post-Windrush, with the Observer
newspaper giving frontpage coverage to the early stages of this inquiry
91
. We expect
public, media and parliamentary interest in this topic to continue in the coming
months and years, and hence we are keen to encourage and support tangible steps
that can be taken to improve the situation.
5.2 Recommendations
Annex 3
92
to this report gives shorter-term/lower-cost and longer-term/potentially
higher cost recommendations for each of the six main issues identified in this report.
We encourage UKVI to seriously reflect on all of these issues, and each of the eight
recommendations made, sharing publicly with this inquiry its assessment of what
steps can be taken, and when.
For brevity, we highlight below the seven most significant recommendations we wish
90
Online Appendix - http://
bit.ly/APPGvisas
91
Harriet Grant, ‘Prejudiced’
Home Office refusing visas
to African researchers, The
Observer, 8th June 2019,
Front Page
92
Annex 3-
Recommendations Tabular
Form (See online Appendix)
44 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
to make, indicating the relative cost of the measures.
To improve the application process:
1. Introduce an expedited application process for those applicants who currently
have to travel to a neighbouring country to apply and/or be interviewed for a visa,
recognising the increased difficulties they face because of the lack of a VAC in the
country of application (low cost).
2. Provide clearer and more detailed information to applicants on visa application
processes and requirements, especially in terms of supporting documents that
must be submitted by the applicant. Greater efforts should be made to make
clear the timescales required, such that applicants know if they are submitting an
application which is unlikely to be processed before the date of travel (low cost).
3. Where decision-making is fully digitized, ensure documents are scanned in the
country of application, allowing applicants to keep their documents if they wish
(medium cost).
4. Increase the number of countries with VACs, or else look to use local FCO facilities,
or establish partnership arrangements with other countries to share facilities
(higher cost).
To improve decision-making:
5. Strengthen quality control systems for rejection letters before they issue,
in particular to ensure the supporting evidence has been fully taken into
account, and that Visit Visa Guidance is changed to prevent prejudicial/biased
assumptions being taken into account in reasons for refusal letters.
6. Where there is clear and compelling evidence that a visit is fully-funded by a
credible UK-based sponsor, either remove the requirement for the applicant to
submit bank statements and prove affluence, or else publish the evidence-base
establishing the causal link between poverty and visa overstays.
7. Support greater input from High Commissions and Embassies into the decision-
making processes as a matter of course. Streamlined processes should be
explored to speed up and simplify the process for VIPs (low cost).
8. Reinforce the role of the Inspectorate and monitor the implementation of the
Inspector’s recommendations, together with a more systematic relationship
between the Chief Inspector and the relevant Parliamentary Select Committee
(medium cost).
The APPGs look forward to meeting again with the Minister of State for Immigration
to discuss the findings of this report, reflect on the recommendations, and explore
what cross-party support can be given to assist the implementation of these
recommendations.
46 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
The Royal African Society (RAS)
The Royal African Society is a membership organisation that provides opportunities
for people to connect, celebrate and engage critically with a wide range of topics
and ideas about Africa today. Through our events, publications and digital channels
we share insight, instigate debate and facilitate mutual understanding between the
UK and Africa. We amplify African voices and interests in academia, business, politics,
the arts and education, reaching a network of more than one million people globally.
www.royalafricansociety.org | @RoyAfriSoc
The African Studies Association UK (ASAUK)
The African Studies Association of the United Kingdom was founded in 1963 and is
the national subject association for Africanists within the academic community. The
objects of ASAUK as defined in its statutes are to advance African Studies, particularly
in the United Kingdom, by providing facilities for the interchange of information and
ideas and the co-ordination of activities.
www.asauk.net | @ASAUK_News
African Foundation for Development (AFFORD)
AFFORD was established in 1994, with a mission “to expand and enhance the
contributions Africans in the diaspora make to African development”. Priority projects
and activities are focused on diaspora contributions to job creation through African
enterprise development. AFFORD’s mission is achieved through programmes and
projects undertaken solely or in collaboration with partners in Africa, the U.K, E.U and
other parts of the world.
www.afford-uk.org | @AFFORD_UK
The Scotland Malawi Partnership (SMP)
The Scotland Malawi Partnership is the national civil society network coordinating,
representing and supporting 1,200 people-to-people links between our two
nations. It represents a community of 109,000 people in Scotland with active links
to Malawi, as part of a shared history that dates back 160 years to the travels of Dr
David Livingstone. An estimated 45% of Scots can today name a friend or family
member with a connection to Malawi. This approach is based not on ‘donors’ and
‘recipients’ but on long-standing, mutually-beneficial community-to-community,
family-to-family and people-to-people links, each on its own quite modest in
scale but, together, a formidable force for progressive change. The SMP is a
charity independent of government but kindly core funded by successive Scottish
Governments. Scotland’s friendship with Malawi enjoys all-party political support
from all 59 Scottish MPs and all 129 MSPs, as well as the governments of Scotland,
the UK and Malawi. The SMP provides the secretariat for the Malawi All-Party
Parliamentary Group in Westminster and the Malawi Cross Party Group in Holyrood.
www.scotland-malawipartnership.org | @ScotlandMalawi
47 | Visa problems for African visitors to the UK
All Party Parliamentary Group Africa
The Africa APPG exists to facilitate mutually beneficial relationships between Africa
and the UK and works to further understanding within UK parliament of contemporary
African and Pan-African matters. The APPG creates space for parliamentarians to
engage in dialogue with African diaspora, civil society, institutions, thought leaders
and private sector to promote African led-development agendas and challenge
negative stereotypes through positive relationships between the UK and African
countries. And with a membership of over 200 parliamentarians from across-parties
and houses, it is one of the largest and most active APPGs in UK parliament. The group
is chaired by Chi Onwurah MP & Lord David Chidgey.
www.royalafricansociety.org/appg-africa | @AfricaAPPG
All Party Parliamentary Group for Diaspora, Development & Migration
The APPG on Diaspora, Development, and Migration (DDM) aims to promote
parliamentary and public understanding of the key issues affecting diaspora
communities in the UK, and to expand and enhance their contributions to the
international development agenda. APPG DDM works to connect parliamentarians
with diaspora organisations, academics and civil society groups to inform policy on
how diaspora contributions can be harnessed for a greater impact, especially at a
time when migration issues are surrounded by negative rhetoric.
www.afford-uk.org/what-we-do/projects/appg-ddm/
Malawi All Party Parliamentary Group
The Malawi APPG exists to promote understanding and awareness among
parliamentarians, positive relations between our countries, and provide a forum for
discussion on relevant issues affecting politics, society, culture and the economy in
Malawi. It brings together MPs and Peers from across the UK with a particular interest
in UK-Malawi relations.
www.scotland-malawipartnership.org/get-involved/malawi-appg/
This report was researched and written by Hetty Bailey, Paul Asquith, David Hope-Jones and Ambreena Manji and was jointly funded by
The Royal African Society, AFFORD- UK, The Scotland-Malawi Partnership and ASA-UK .
