Marriage to
Partners from
Overseas
Pro Forma for Responses
Please return this form to:
Marriage Consultation Responses
Border and Immigration Agency
11th Floor, Apollo House
36 Wellesley Road
Croydon CR9 3RR
Responses must be received by 27th February 2008
This document is available in electronic format on the Border &
Immigration Agency website: www.bia.homeoffice.gov.uk
Responses can be sent electronically to:
marriageconsultationresponses@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk
Please feel free to provide comments on additional sheets if there
is not sufficient space on this form, please specify which
question(s) you are responding to on any additional sheets.
ISSUE 1:
Young people may be pressurised into sponsoring a partner from
overseas.
Q1. Do you think we should increase the minimum age at which someone
could sponsor or be sponsored as a spouse, from 18 to 21?
This would allow the young people involved to have completed
their education as well as allowing them to have gained in
maturity and possess adequate life skills. Although there would
be a small delay in the age at which young people could sponsor
a partner from overseas, we think that this is not unreasonable.
Yes
No
Comment
We strongly affirm the principle reflected in the consultation
that forced marriage is wrong both morally and legally. The
practice of forcing one of the partners to marry in order to be
able to sponsor a marriage visa and gain immigration advantage
cannot be justified and is to be strongly condemned. We support
policy that is most likely to give protection to those who most
need it.
The idea of personal consent is key for the Christian
understandings of marriage. The Christian description of marriage
as a voluntary union for life between one woman and one man, to
the exclusion of all others, has its roots in the early Biblical
stories in Genesis. Marriage has been understood in the Christian
tradition as a sign of the love between Christ and his Church,
which is freely given not forced. Therefore what essentially makes
a true marriage in the Christian understanding is the couple’s
voluntary consent to a lifelong monogamous union.
The Church of England is committed to marriage preparation and
that couples fully understand the vows they are taking. As the
Anglican Marriage service states, no one should enter into
marriage lightly or selfishly but reverently and responsibly. We
recognise that there may be some young people who are vulnerable
to pressure from families to sponsor a partner and we believe that
good marriage preparation would detect whether a young person was
entering into marriage for the right reasons. There is a strong
case for increased resources for marriage preparation, education
and counselling for groups working with those most at risk of
being exploited, particularly if there were a risk of unintended
consequences as outlined in para 2.11.
Q2. Should someone intending to sponsor a partner from overseas
declare this intention before they leave the UK on the
visit/trip?
This would also involve providing details of the person to be
sponsored before leaving the UK. In this way the sponsoring
partner will be protected from having coercive pressure applied
whilst they are overseas and help to prevent forced marriages
before they happen. Such an arrangement would mean that a young
person would know in advance that a marriage will take place
overseas and who their prospective partner will be. Many spouses
currently only discover these facts overseas when their wedding
is imminent and when they are in a vulnerable position in a
foreign country away from their support network and the
authorities. Finding out that they will be a bride or groom
before travel gives them more options to seek help prior to the
actual marriage.
Yes
No
Comment
We believe that this is a reasonable request to ask and is
consistent with the key principle of marriage that it is based on
personal consent. However there should be advice and resources
given at the time of the declaration in order to give them more
options to seek help should this not be what they truly want.
ISSUE 2:
Many sponsors would like to be able to give a confidential
statement.
Q3. Should potential sponsors be given more opportunities to have a
confidential interview if they request one?
The confidential interview might not lead to refusal of a visa
application. The aim would not be to assess the genuineness of
the marriage, but whether sufficient scope had been given to
protect the potentially vulnerable party. On its own though, a
confidential statement that could not be produced as evidence
may not lead to a visa application being turned down. We are
also considering introducing a Code of Practice, which would say
how an application for a marriage visa should progress if one of
the parties is identified as vulnerable. This would build on
work carried out by Entry Clearance Officers in relation to in
depth interviews with couples.
Yes
No
Comment
We agree that potential sponsors should be given opportunity and
space to express their doubts in a place where they feel safe.
This is consistent with the principle of consent and support for
those entering into marriage. We believe that clear information
about interviews and what they can offer should be made available
to all those entering the system. There is a real danger that it
is precisely the cases where sponsors would most benefit from a
confidential interview which are the cases where the potential
sponsor was least aware of the possibility. There should also be
clear safeguards and guidelines for those conducting the
interview about disclosure of information given at interviews.
Q4. Do you think we should introduce a Code of Practice as outlined
in this consultation paper?
Yes
No
Comment
We recognise the difficulty in defining vulnerability but believe
it is important to establish consistency and transparency so that
people are treated fairly.
Q5. We have suggested some of the factors that might indicate
vulnerability to a forced marriage (for example, discrepancies
in age, main language spoken etc); what additional factors do
you think there might be?
Comment
Factors indicating vulnerability should be drawn up in
consultation with those working with people who are vulnerable to
forced marriage.
Q5a. If some of the factors that create vulnerability were present,
should there be a power to refuse on those grounds alone,
without the sponsor having to provide an evidential statement?
Yes
No
Comment
It is our experience when marrying couples that difference does
not necessarily mean a marriage is suspect. Differences can bring
interest and depth to a relationship. They do not automatically
‘create’ vulnerability. We agree that age discrepancies or other
differences should be used as initial indicators to flag up
concerns of vulnerability and a need to explore the sponsorship
request (such as offering a confidential interview). However we
would not support them being used as evidence to refuse on these
grounds alone. Relying on one criterion without hearing other
evidence would be unjust as it would rely on prima facie evidence
rather than on fact.
ISSUE 3:
Spouses who are abandoned by a person they have sponsored have
entitlements too, including knowing that their sponsorship is not
being abused for further advantages.
Q6. Do you think that we should do more to bring about revocation of
indefinite leave to remain if individuals abuse the marriage
route to gain settlement?
Yes
No
Comment
Procedures put into place by the Border and Immigration Agency
must take into account protection of any children from the
relationship. We are also concerned that this could increase the
number of people trapped in marriages which they would otherwise
wish to end but couldn’t because of pressure from the sponsored
partner.
Q6a. If you answered yes to question 6, what proof do you think
might be necessary to do this?
Comment
Proof of abuse of the marriage route will depend on assessment of
the genuineness of the marriage at the point of sponsorship and
will mainly depend on evidence given by the sponsoring person or
their family, who may already be in a vulnerable position. Any
evidence gathered must not increase their vulnerability.
Q7. Do you think we should be able to revoke indefinite leave to
remain after it has been granted if the sponsoring partner is
abandoned?
We would have to agree a time period within which we could
revoke indefinite leave to remain.
Yes
No
Comment
We would like to see a distinction between breakdown of a marriage
relationship (which means there was a genuine desire to create a
marriage on the outset) and abandonment of the sponsor.
Abandonment of a marriage may be an indicator of abuse of the
marriage route but not necessarily so. We would want to emphasise
the importance of discerning genuine personal consent since that
would greatly reduce the likelihood of abandonment (though
breakdown of the marriage relationship would obviously still be a
possibility). We agree that there should be a time period set for
abandonment before which enquiries could be made on grounds of
abuse of the marriage route.
Q8. Do you think we should do more to investigate allegations of
abuse of marriage for immigration advantage after entry?
Yes
No
Comment
Allegations of abuse of marriage for immigration advantage after
entry by the sponsoring partner should always be taken seriously
in order to protect the vulnerable. However there should also be
some sort of protection of the person being sponsored against
malicious allegations and all investigations should be transparent
and fair.
Q8a. If you answered yes to question 8, how might these be
investigated?
Comment
See above
Q9. What sanctions could we use if individuals abuse
route to gain settlement? Examples could include
indefinite leave to remain, revocation of spouse
grant of indefinite leave to remain, and refusal
leave to remain.
the marriage
revocation of
visa prior to
of any further
Comment
We agree that sanctions should be taken. Being made to sponsor a
partner for purposes of immigration advantage is tantamount to
aiding and abetting a sexual crime and is as serious as forced
marriage itself. As with forced marriage, there may be situations
where sanctions resulting from criminal law might be applicable.
Q10. What provisions might be necessary for safeguarding women, in
particular, after the entry of a sponsored spouse? (For
instance; a helpline, access to immigration advice, and support
in making statements).
At the moment spouses who act as sponsors and are abandoned have
their role as sponsor ended on the basis of someone else’s
decision. One view is that the person who originally provided
the sponsorship is entitled to an assurance that their
sponsorship in bringing someone to the UK has not been abused in
any way. This might mean that a subsequent application from the
person sponsored is treated as a change of original purpose,
rather than circumstances, and that we should endeavour to take
into account any views that the original sponsor might wish to
provide. We are interested in views on whether this is a good
way of providing such an assurance.
Comment
There should be support and advice given to women, perhaps through
extending the resources and remit of the Forced Marriage Unit, who
have been building expertise and trust in this area.
Q11. What is wrong with the current system in relation to abandoned
spouses that could be improved?
Comment
A priest who is working in a parish where this is a real issue and
has mush expertise and experience writes: ‘The problem with
devising a system to deal with complicated issues is that it
doesn’t police the margins well. It is precisely at the margins
that we often find cases of forced marriage. Behind each
application as behind every marriage is a particular story and
real people. Only by seeking to understand this story and by
engaging with people will you truly know if consent is being given
and if the marriage is genuine. This has been an underpinning
principle of the pastoral approach of the Church. Only if the
system is capable of looking at people’s stories and in effect
getting to know individuals will you be able to tell if a person
is being placed under duress’.
Q11a.
What changes could be made to improve communications with
abandoned spouses? E.g. provide further information to them
about further applications or applications for indefinite leave
to remain by the person they sponsored, and even seek their
views, so that their role as a sponsor is not ended by their
being abandoned.
Comment
It will depend on the situation of the abandoned spouse. We would
hope that the Agency would take its signposting role seriously and
be able to provide information for people to get support and
advice.
For statistical purposes, please indicate in which region of the UK
you or the organisation you represent is based.
England
Scotland
Wales
Northern Ireland
Please complete the following details:
Name of company/organisation/individual
Mission and Public Affairs Council of the Church of England
Address of company/organisation/individual
Church House, Great Smith Street, LONDON, SW1P 3AZ
Telephone
0207 898 1535 (Direct line to Sue Burridge, Policy Adviser in
Marriage and Family for the Church of England)
Your name
The Right Revd Tom Butler, Bishop of Southwark
Your position (if from a company/organisation)
Vice- Chair of the Mission and Public Affairs Council. The Mission
& Public Affairs Council of the Church of England is the body
responsible for overseeing research and comment on social and
political issues on behalf of the Church. The Council comprises a
representative group of bishops, clergy and lay people with
interest and expertise in the relevant areas, and reports to the
General Synod through the Archbishops’ Council.
This submission has been prepared by the staff and Chair of the
Mission and Public Affairs Division, and draws upon the views of
members of the MPA Council (and earlier work of the Division,
General Synod etc) and other advisers working in this area.
Please return this form to:
Marriage Consultation Responses
Border and Immigration Agency
11th Floor, Apollo House
36 Wellesley Road
Croydon CR9 3RR
Responses must be received by 27th February 2008
This document is available in electronic format on the Border &
Immigration Agency website: www.bia.homeoffice.gov.uk
Responses can be sent electronically to:
marriageconsultationresponses@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk