
Fleeing from the war in Somalia, Sofia sought refuge in Britain. She has been raped, left destitute on the streets of Glasgow, is HIV-positive, and cannot find her two daughters, whom she believes may yet be stranded in Somalia. Six years after her arrival Sofia is still waiting for a decision by the British government as to whether she will be granted refugee status. Meanwhile, she lives out a precarious existence in a run-down block of flats and volunteers to work with the stream of refugees that continues to flow into Glasgow. Here, she tells her story
I was raped twice in Somalia and I fled from the war. The government don’t recognise the tribe I am from as part of the country. I was forced to leave my two daughters behind and an agent brought me to Britain in 2002. He brought me to Glasgow. I didn’t speak any English at that time and he told me not to speak to anyone.
He took me to a hotel and raped me. I didn’t know what time of the day it was when he told me we had to leave the hotel; he told me he needed to check if the place where we were supposed to be going to was open. He bought me a cup of tea and told me to wait on some steps in the street. I waited for over an hour, but I knew he wasn’t going to come back.
Then I saw a woman who I thought might speak my language. Luckily she understood me. She took me to the Refugee Council where I received help. They found me a place to live and helped me with my claim for refugee status.
It was when I went to see a doctor that I discovered I was HIV-positive. I felt so sick; it was like I was dying. I just wanted to be with my daughters. Now I am on drugs to keep me healthy, but they make me bloated.
I had been in my accommodation for six months when I was called to an interview at the Home Office: my claim for asylum was rejected. The National Asylum Support Service cut all my support and I was left with nowhere to live and no money. It was too dangerous for me to return to Somalia – it still is.
From this moment I was destitute. I didn’t know where to go. I couldn’t stay with the friends I had made because they were refugees on support and were prohibited from having anyone to stay in their accommodation. With nowhere to go I spent my days drifting around the city. Some friends risked their own security and let me spend the night with them, but I could only go to them late in the evening and I had to leave early the next day to make sure no one knew I was staying there. Thanks to my friends I was able to eat.
After two months of living like this, I was told about a charity called Positive Action in Housing, who help refugees who have been made destitute. I went to them and they found somewhere for me to stay for a few days. They put me in contact with a lawyer who helped me apply for a type of support called Section 4. It’s the only help left for an asylum-seeker whose application is refused under the case for human rights. They also gave me some money to buy food.
While my case for Section 4 support was in progress I was still destitute. Positive Action in Housing arranged for a volunteer to accommodate me; I stayed with her for almost two months. I’m so grateful to her as I would have had nothing while I was waiting for my claim to come through. During this time I began to volunteer for the Citizens Advice Bureau and also in the office of Positive Action in Housing.
Eventually I was granted Section 4 support. It gives me accommodation and £35 in vouchers each week to spend in ASDA supermarket only. I’m a Muslim and I can’t buy Halal food in this supermarket. Sometimes I can’t find the right size clothes in ASDA either: I need a winter coat and I can’t find one to fit.
I had been in my accommodation in the YMCA for a year when they said they had to remove all the single people from the building to make room for families. They moved me to a different area of Glasgow where I was the only refugee in a whole block of flats. My flat was firebombed twice and I experienced terrible racial harassment. I lived in fear for my life. I reported the incidents, but it took one year for the authorities to find me somewhere else to live.
Although I had this horrifying experience, I have seen relations between locals and refugees improving in the past few years in Glasgow. Many local people in Scotland are very supportive of refugees.
I don’t know when I will be granted my status as a refugee. I have a family – my daughters, who are now 18 and 21 – and I also have brothers. I don’t know where they are. Sometimes, when I think of my girls, I feel like I’m going crazy; I can’t sleep at night. If I could work I would have more access to organisations that could help me find them. At the moment I can’t travel out of Glasgow (to London, for example) to begin my search.
While I am waiting for my case to be resolved, I spend my time doing volunteer work: I volunteer for the British Red Cross and provide orientation for new refugees arriving in Glasgow. I also volunteer at the day surgery in the YMCA – again helping new refugees and giving them advice. Some people arrive with no clothes, so I take them to a charity shop to help them find things to wear. I also volunteer as an interpreter for refugees arriving from Somalia.
It has been six years now since I arrived in the UK. I come from a country where there is war and I can’t go back. I am still waiting to be recognised as a refugee; only then I will be able to work and create a life – and find my children.
• Sofia, whose name has been changed to protect her identity, was interviewed by Ann Scholl.
18 responses so far ↓
shuck // January 16, 2008 at 7:43 pm |
If this lady was informed by the Home Office six months after arriving in the UK some six years ago, then what decision is she waiting waiting for from the UK government? Surely by this time she has exhausted all her appeal rights and has no legal basis (other than documentation issues) to remain in he UK?
It looks like she is a failed asylum seeker who should go home immediately, rather than abusing the system.
shuck // January 16, 2008 at 7:46 pm |
Sorry, I should have said:
If this lady was informed by the Home Office six months after arriving in the UK some six years ago that her application for asylum was refused, then what decision is she waiting waiting for from the UK government?
Angus McKay // January 18, 2008 at 10:06 pm |
Hi shuck, you ask,
‘If this lady was informed by the Home Office six months after arriving in the UK some six years ago, then what decision is she waiting for from the UK government?’
Good question and one the Home Office should answer.
More questions. Why did she ‘flee’ all the way to Britain?
Why did she not seek asylum in the nearest safe country to Somalia?
When she was informed her claim for asylum had been rejected, why did she refuse to accept the Home Office decision and leave Britain?
Why is she still waiting for a decision? – the decision has been made – she will not accept it.
The overriding mistake here is being made by the Home Office. Asylum seekers who have had their claims rejected should not be allowed to leave the ‘immigration’ office. They should be immediately deported to their country of origin by whatever means necessary. Why does the Home Office continually allow failed asylum seekers to return to where they live which gives the asylum seeker the opportunity to abscond or be hidden illegally by their sympathizers?
Having her claim for asylum rejected strips Sofia of her title of asylum seeker – she is now an illegal immigrant.
She states that her claim for asylum was rejected and from that moment she was destitute. She was told to return to Somalia. She refused to leave. She made herself destitute. She is an illegal immigrant who absconded. Any person or group who assisted her was acting illegally.
She complains of her free accommodation, her free £35 weekly vouchers, she can’t find the right size clothes in ASDA and she needs a winter coat and can’t find one to fit. I don’t care.
In Glasgow there are thousands of our own people who cannot heat their homes due to lack of finance. Some will die from hypothermia this winter. I care.
Poor ‘Sofia’ can’t find a winter coat to fit her from the free money we give her.
Sofia tells us she is HIV-positive and is receiving free drugs through our National Health Service. Some of our own people will die because our National Health Service will not provide their drugs due to their treatment being too costly.
Poor ‘Sofia’s’ free drugs make her ‘bloated.’
If ‘Sofia’ and the hundreds of thousands of illegals would return to their own countries, Britain would have billions of pounds of our own money to spend on our own people instead of supporting illegal economic migrants from other countries.
Message to ‘Sofia’ – if I had become separated from any member of my family (in your case, your two daughters) I would not be hanging about a foreign country waiting to be ‘recognised as a refugee’. I would go anywhere and do anything to find them. ‘Sofia’, you will not find your daughters in Glasgow. Leave Britain and search for your daughters.
Michael Woods // January 21, 2008 at 11:25 am |
Moderator,
having read the above from shuck and mckay I request they are banned from comment on this blog on the grounds that :
They have both unjustly accused Sophia of abusing the system, which is libellous.
Mckay has further accused all who have assisted her of breaking the law, also libellous and very actionable indeed.
They are demonstrably attempting to denigrate the system by which we are governed by accusing the Home Office in particular of facilitating the flight of asylum seekers –
He says -
“Why does the Home Office continually allow failed asylum seekers to return to where they live which gives the asylum seeker the opportunity to abscond or be hidden illegally by their sympathizers?”
In my view there is no place for them on a blog in which attempt is made at rational discussion of such a serious and emotive subject.
Michael Woods.
shuck // January 21, 2008 at 9:05 pm |
Youknowwho wrote:
“Moderator,
having read the above from shuck and mckay I request they are banned from comment on this blog on the grounds that :
They have both unjustly accused Sophia of abusing the system, which is libellous”.
Maybe youknowwho can explain what he means by unjust in this case?
I doubt that he will be able to offer a justifiable reason why being I presume a failed asylum seeker who has exhausted all her appeal rights, has she not yet left the UK as no doubt instructed by the Home Office.
If this is the case then she has no right to be here. Simple as that.
shuck // January 21, 2008 at 9:08 pm |
Moderator I would like to request that my comments are no longer moderated?
Angus McKay // January 21, 2008 at 10:10 pm |
youknowwho requests shuck and mckay are banned from comment on this blog on the grounds that:-
1 … ’They have both unjustly accused Sophia of abusing the system, which is libellous.’
‘Sophia’ abused the system. She arrived in Britain in 2002 with the intention of applying for refugee status. After six months she had her claim for refugee status listened to by the Home Office and a decision was taken that her claim was unfounded and said claim for asylum was rejected. ‘Sophia’ chose not to accept the decision of the Home Office and leave Britain. ‘Sophia’ chose to go into hiding and in doing so made herself destitute. Having refused to leave Britain she became an illegal immigrant.
I assert:- ‘Sophia’ refused to accept the rules and decisions of our ‘system’ and in doing so she is guilty of abusing our ‘system’.
2 … ‘Mckay has further accused all who have assisted her of breaking the law, also libellous and very actionable indeed.’
An illegal immigrant is a criminal who is abusing our system by being in Britain. Anyone or any group who assists an illegal immigrant is ‘breaking the law’. The illegal immigrant should be reported to the relevant authorities to assist in the deportation of the illegal. Currently our Government, via the media, is informing employers they will be fined £1,000 should they employ an illegal immigrant.
3 … ‘They are demonstrably attempting to denigrate the system by which we are governed by accusing the Home Office in particular of facilitating the flight of asylum seekers -’
Clarification of ‘by accusing the Home Office in particular of facilitating the flight of asylum seekers -’ would assist me in answering her/his threat of legal action.
4 … ‘He (‘mckay’) says:- Why does the Home Office continually allow failed asylum seekers to return to where they live which gives the asylum seeker the opportunity to abscond or be hidden illegally by their sympathizers?”
As I have stated in a previous posting on this website:-
Quote from a communication from the Immigration Department:- ‘in a recent experiment approximately 40 families we invited to present themselves for deportation but of these, approximately 39 then disappeared and have not been seen since.’ From this occurrence, the Home Office are obviously fully aware of the way in which asylum seekers refuse to accept the rules and decisions of our ‘system’. This raises the question:- ‘Why then does the Home Office continually allow failed asylum seekers to return to where they live which gives the asylum seeker the opportunity to abscond or be hidden illegally by their sympathizers?’
Should youknowwho or another wish to take action against any of my comments, feel free to do so. I await communication.
youknowwho’s problem is he is now aware that to use the old, tired shout of RACIST, RACIST, RACIST is laughable. She/he now attempts to silence those who speak out against asylum and illegal immigration by banning them from forums and threatening them with the use of law. Production of youknowwho’s previous comments on this website would prove her/him to be a totally wacky witness.
shuck // January 21, 2008 at 10:34 pm |
Just Checking
Michael Woods // January 22, 2008 at 11:07 am |
Justifiable reason is :
Sofia has stated quite clearly she was granted Section 4 support by the government. Shuck’s assertion she should go home immediately is not only unjust but abusive of one who has no option but to suffer it.
Mackay elaborates on this abuse and therefore has also forfeited the right to comment.
We should no longer give these abusive bigots a voice.
In my humble opinion.
Michael Woods // January 22, 2008 at 12:58 pm |
The home Office guidance states :
” There are strict requirements you must meet in order to qualify for section 4 support. You must be destitute and satisfy one of the following requirements:
you are taking all reasonable steps to leave the United Kingdom or placing yourself in a position where you can do so;
you are unable to leave the United Kingdom because of a physical barrier to travel or for some other medical reason;
you are unable to leave the United Kingdom because the Border and Immigration Agency believes there is no safe route available;
you have either applied for a judicial review of your asylum application in Scotland or applied for a judicial review of your asylum application in England, Wales or Northern Ireland and been given permission to proceed with it; or
accommodation is necessary to prevent a breach of your rights, within the meaning of the Human Rights Act 1998. ”
Sofia has fulfilled all the requirements of the law, has been granted section 4 support and should not be abused by persons who themselves cower behind the anonymity of the web.
Therefore in view of the above scurrilous libels against the wholly innocent Sofia I again ask that shuck and mckay be permanently barred from comment.
shuck // January 23, 2008 at 7:07 pm |
Dear First Minister,
As you will no doubt be aware, Immigration and asylum affairs are not devolved to the Scottish Government and remain within the juristiction of Westminister. Therefore I would urge you not not attempt to get involved in this case as you have no authority to do so.
Failed asylum seekers should be removed from the UK and this family have no legal basis to remain here and as such should be removed.
[Moderator: Do not repeat post (flood) - One week ban enforced due to repeated warning. No postings from ths commentator will be approved before 01/Feb/08]
Michael Woods // January 24, 2008 at 5:31 pm |
Having just re-read the report above I can find nowhere any grounds for the accusation –
” ‘Sophia’ chose not to accept the decision of the Home Office and leave Britain. ‘Sophia’ chose to go into hiding and in doing so made herself destitute. ” –
Again the shagnus person has misread a report and has emerged from his troglodyte accommodation to unjustly and falsely accuse yet another innocent of criminal intent.
At least the children of those who seek asylum here make it their business to master the language. It is a pity that after a lifetime here their detractors frequently cannot.
Please banish the troll to his cave to gnaw on the bones of yet another defeat.
Angus McKay // January 24, 2008 at 10:11 pm |
” ‘Sophia’ chose not to accept the decision of the Home Office and leave Britain. ‘Sophia’ chose to go into hiding and in doing so made herself destitute. ” -
‘Sophia’ states …. ‘my claim for asylum was rejected. The National Asylum Support Service cut all my support and I was left with nowhere to live and no money.’
‘Sophia’ was officially informed that the Home Office did not accept her asylum claim – she had no right to be in Britain – should have left Britain – she chose not to – she absconded and went into hiding – she made herself destitute.
Angus McKay // January 24, 2008 at 10:14 pm |
To the moderator(s)
Positive Action in Housing has a responsibility to maintain a moral and courteous website to those who grant funding, those who donate and those who visit the website for reference or comment.
I am at a loss as to why PAiH continues to publish the foul-mouthed, obscene insults from the unhealthy mind of youknowwho.
I would request PAiH in future delete the offensive language from youknowwho’s comments.
[Moderator: You will find Positive Action in Housing's website at http://www.paih.org. This wordpress is where news and appeals in relation to PAIH's work can be found.]
Michael Woods // January 25, 2008 at 11:44 am |
Again shagnus you have based your tirade on your misreading of the report. Nowhere does it say Sofia went into hiding, it does say she was rendered destitute.
You really should learn to read shagnus, your misreadings and subsequent rants based on those misreadings are at least borderline delusional.
In my opinion your embellishment of stories in order to berate and abuse wholly innocent victims such as Sofia is significant of a mind completely lacking in the normal level of empathy and judgement we associate with a civilised person. And totally unacceptable.
When you called yourself Robert Mackenzie and were subsequently barred from posting I felt you should seek help. I still do.
Angus McKay // January 25, 2008 at 10:11 pm |
Shuck, Sighthillman, Angus McKay, True Glaswegian, Robert McKenzie, Shiela, Dave Charnley. All one and the same person – according to the wacky mind of youknowho.
Unable to accept that the vast majority of sane, civilized people are against asylum and immigration, youknowwho attempts to falsify the true figures by presenting them as one person. youknowwho’s overwrought mind can’t quite manage figures – in a previous posting he worked out that £60 + £7 = £ 70.
I am reluctant to make reference to the mental illness of youknowwho as she/he is probably under medical care ……. Instead I offer another of his previous postings:-
posted by youknowwho on December 29, 2007 at 11:54 am ………..
‘Now youknowhoooooooooo stop teasing the poor dears and stop talking to yourself as well. The fact that they hold inane pseudo-conversations with themselves does’nt give you the excuse.
And stoppit with the spiders, what would you do with their names, addresses and telephone numbers anyway ? Foolish boy !’
mcneil // January 24, 2009 at 2:04 am |
I am truly sickened by the way in which people have responded to this article. I, myself am a Scottish immigrant living in Canada and clearly my memories of Scotland in which bigotry was a thing of the past are romanticised. As a post colonial country it is time that Britain takes responsibility for the heinous and unlawful acts committed and the way in which we have effected countries such as Somalia.
Having studied politics of Immigration for a number of years now I find it shocking that the majority of the respondents here are unable to differentiate between economic immigrants and victims of forced immigration such as Sofia. The lack of compassion and empathy in this website saddens me, one thing that has become apparent through these responses is that not only does Scotland need to invest more in the care of asylum seekers, but clearly we have a desperate need for an improved education system so that individuals such as Michael Woods can receive the education they are so clearly in need of.
mcneil // January 24, 2009 at 2:11 am |
I would like to apologise as I mistakenly used the name Michael Woods when in fact I meant to refer to Angus Mckay and in fact McKay’s apparent and desperate need for education.