Report launch: the asylum system has persistent gaps with non-religious claims

A new report launched today by Dr Lucy Potter, Research Fellow at the University of York, has identified persistent gaps in the treatment of non-religious claims within the UK asylum system.

This report looks at the experiences of people who have left their religion and then sought asylum in the UK. Based on three years of research, it shows that many non-religious asylum seekers are not properly understood by the system meant to protect them. Instead, they are often judged by standards that do not fit their experiences, asked unfair questions, expected to prove a lack of belief, and let down by poor interpretation and a lack of training. The result is not just a few bad decisions, but a wider system that fails people who are at risk because they are non-religious.

The report calls for straightforward changes to make the asylum system fairer for non-religious claimants: 

• Home Office guidance should clearly say that the ‘religion’ ground includes non-religious people. 
• Country information should properly cover the risks faced by so-called ‘apostates’.
• Credibility tests should stop relying on narrow or irrelevant ideas about what non-belief looks like.
• Staff should receive better training in freedom of religion or belief so they can assess claims more accurately and consistently.
• A fairer approach to evidence, recognising that many people cannot easily ‘prove’ a lack of belief in the way the system currently expects.

Dr Lucy Potter, Research Fellow at the University of York, said:

‘I’ve met people who have sought asylum who have spent years trying to explain something that most people find simple: Why they no longer believe in the religion they were born into. They have been asked to pinpoint the exact moment they stopped believing, what philosophical arguments convinced them, and why they could not simply return home and stay silent about their views.

‘Many had no documents to prove their disbelief, no community leaders able to verify their identity, and often little language to describe what was, for them, a deeply personal transition.

‘Simply being accused of blasphemy can put your life at risk before any criminal trial, and even then, many individuals labelled as ‘blasphemers’ often struggle to find legal representation. In many countries, the primary threat is non-state actors, which can be mobs, extremist groups, or even family members, and in effect, many are forced to hide their beliefs or continue to conform to practices.’

Lizzi Collinge, Labour MP for Morecambe and Lunesdale, and Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Humanist Group, said:

‘Quite clearly, any decision we get wrong in the asylum system will have catastrophic consequences for that individual and their community… This report is critical for feeding into that asylum system.

‘My main takeaway from this research is that we need to centralise the experience of people who have faced persecution for leaving a religion and make sure policies recognise that not everyone has the same experience in a country.’

Andrew Copson, Chief Executive of Humanists UK, said:

‘This research is groundbreaking, the findings are very stark, and we know this already from our work supporting people who have left high-control religions. We have a lot of work to do to ensure that the non-religious are understood by policymakers.’

‘Blasphemy laws are in place in 91 countries, affecting over half of the global population. 12 countries impose the death penalty for so-called apostasy or blasphemy crimes, and a further 60 countries have prison sentences for blasphemy and apostasy.

‘But, as Dr Potter’s research sets out, this persecution and its human impact are often overlooked and misunderstood. It is essential that those who are able to flee persecution to claim asylum in the UK on the basis of their non-religious beliefs are fairly assessed in their claims, and do not face yet more discrimination on our shores.’

Jamie Bell, solicitor in the public law and immigration department at Duncan Lewis Solicitors, said:

‘I’ve never had a non-religious case that wasn’t complicated, didn’t require time, didn’t take a lot to be understood.

‘Most individuals will struggle to find legal aid to help them with their cases. The standard for decision-making has gone down, and the scope for error has gone up… A case will be refused for lack of resources.’

During the event, an anonymous statement was read out from a woman who sought asylum after leaving her religion. It said:

‘The decision to leave my home and seek asylum was one of the most difficult and painful decisions I have ever made. It meant accepting that I might never return, and that I would lose my family, my community, and everything familiar to me. But after my lack of belief became known within my community, the danger became too great, and I had no choice but to leave. I came to the United Kingdom hoping for safety and the ability to live freely. However, the asylum process itself was extremely challenging.’