By Lucy Potter
Signatories to the Refugee Convention have recognised persecution on the grounds of ‘religion’ is a basis for an asylum claim. However, anecdotal evidence from this project’s collaborative partner suggests there are significant misunderstandings in decision-making processes, for nonreligious asylum seekers who claim on the same grounds. Although the legalities and drawbacks of the British asylum system are generally well-documented, there are very few studies that address religion-based asylum claims in the UK.
The project will consider the legal landscape of nonreligious human rights, an analysis of the UK’s Home Office asylum determination policies, and apply a focus on the lived experience of nonreligious people who have sought asylum on these grounds. This project is funded by the University of Sheffield, conducted collaboratively with the leading human rights organisation – Humanists UK, in the hope that the outcomes of this project will lead to an improvement in the inclusion of the nonreligious in consistent asylum determination.
Through Humanists UK asylum advocacy work, this collaborative partner has unique access to the participants in this study. This PhD project will seek to capture in-depth and data-rich academic research. Underpinned by qualitative methodologies, it will undertake document analysis of key international law articles as well as the UK’S Home Office policies and guidance. It will also conduct interviews with individuals with experience of claiming asylum on these grounds, human rights advocates, and Home Office officials.
Freedom of Religion or Belief
Freedom of Religion or Belief (FoRB) is a fundamental human right, enshrined in international law under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). Yet, individuals and communities in many parts of the world experience discrimination and marginalisation due to the beliefs they hold. A range of identities can have their right to FoRB undermined such as the Baha’i religious minority suffering grave persecution in Iran. The limiting of access to justice, adequate food, housing and state-sponsored persecution against members of the Falun Gong in China. Women converts from Islam to Christianity in Afghanistan face house arrest, sexual abuse, violence and forced marriage.
As the above examples illustrate, current research surrounding asylum cases submitted under religious persecution are largely considered to be derived from religious minorities and conversion. Absent from these accounts, are how nonreligious beliefs may also be a basis for a religion-based asylum claim. Nonreligious people in particular are believed to be facing an increasing threat to their right of FoRB, yet they are notably overlooked in academic research.
To pick a few examples, in a report by the UK’S All-Party Parliamentary Group for International Freedom of Religion or Belief (APPG for FoRB), in Egypt several prominent atheists and agnostics have been arrested and convicted for their beliefs; the expression of nonreligious beliefs in Iran are deemed virtually impossible due to intense social stigma; and in Iraq the nonreligious are not able to formally identify their beliefs on national ID cards.
In 2022, over 70% of the world’s population reside in countries which severely discriminate against the nonreligious, as reported by Humanists International. The previous Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief, Dr Ahmed Shaheed stated, ‘In my observations, humanists, when they are attacked, are attacked more viciously and brutally than in other cases.’
What’s more, is that 13 countries hold the death penalty for blasphemy and apostasy, 40 more impose prison sentences. Plus, there are extrajudicial murders in several more, such as in Bangladesh and India.
Nonreligion
The number of people identifying as nonreligious is thought to be increasing. In 2010, the PEW Research Center surveyed 1.1 billion religiously unaffiliated people around the world, this made the unaffiliated the third largest religious group globally, following Christians and Muslims. Although, thorough global data is lacking and under-representative due to some states restricting individuals from identifying this way.
The nonreligious is a complex group consisting of a multitude of identities ranging from atheists to freethinkers and humanists. Though they hold different beliefs, they all share a profound experience of discrimination and marginalisation in many different parts of the world. Ranging from widespread distrust of atheists in the US (Gervais, Shariff, and Norenzayan 2011), being viewed as a threat to society and potentially dangerous (Beaman, Steele, and Pringnitz 2018), to deliberate prevention of the ability to express their nonreligious beliefs in society.
The British Asylum System
Due to the threat of persecution, some individuals seek asylum in the UK. However, there are significant misunderstandings of assessing religion-based asylum claims from nonreligious applicants in the British asylum system. This research will work closely with Humanists UK to draw on their work supporting nonreligious asylum claims. They state, ‘the Home Office often does not treat the nonreligious as a distinct belief group with needs that are different to persecuted religious minorities.’ Nonreligious people seeking asylum in the UK are under-researched and there are no official statistics collected by the UK’s Home Office.
The first potential barrier faced by a nonreligious person seeking asylum comes from choosing a ground for asylum. Concerningly, grounds for ‘nonreligion’ are absent from the 1951 Refugee Convention and its 1967 Protocol. Thus, the nonreligious must choose the religion ground of the Convention. There are a series of problems with this. Including not being explicit that holding nonreligious beliefs is in fact a persecuted category. Therefore, this group tends to be overlooked in the British asylum system and hence religious persecution focuses on those from a religious minority or conversion. Due to this misperception, the questions in a credibility assessment are often inappropriate for the nonreligious.
For example, a notorious and well-cited case surrounds a Pakistani national who identifies as a humanist. Faced with death threats for his family after leaving Islam in Pakistan, Hamza bin Walayat made a claim for asylum in the UK. Strikingly, his original asylum claim was rejected by the Home Office because he was asked about his knowledge of Plato and Aristotle – neither of whom were humanists.
Additionally, the country-of-origin information utilised by the UK’s Home Office does not cover instances of religious persecution of the nonreligious at all (with the exception of Bangladesh). In the UK, an assessment of an applicant’s credibility must be consistent with country policy and information notes. However, with a lack of well-established country guidance provided for nonreligious persecution, asylum claims often lead to refusal.
Recently*, the UK has seen the ‘Illegal Migration Bill’ proposed to create new legislation which will see anyone arriving in the UK through non-legal routes denied the right of entry. It is a new strategy put forward by government to act as a ‘deterrence’ policy, despite no evidence of these types of policies working in practice. Research does however demonstrate that enhancing borders leads people to make more dangerous journeys and increase risk of death; and making people more vulnerable to exploitation and forced labour. The Illegal Migration Bill may present new challenges to the nonreligious. It lists 57 countries that are ‘safe’ for people to be removed to, from the UK. In particular, the list includes Nigeria, which holds the death penalty for blasphemy.
There is no doubt more barriers and complications for nonreligious asylum applicants to navigate when seeking protection in the UK. The purpose of this PhD project is to seek out systematic inequalities within the asylum determination process which impede against those who hold nonreligious beliefs. This original contribution to academic research will seek to advance the field of nonreligion and migration studies.
Key words: Nonreligion, religious persecution, asylum, international human rights.
*The Illegal Migration Bill is now an Act of Parliament (law) after receiving Royal Assent on 20th July.
References
Beaman, Lori G., Cory Steele, and Keelin Pringnitz. 2018. “The inclusion of nonreligion in religion and human rights.” Social Compass 65, no. 1 (January): 43-61. https://doi-org.sheffield.idm.oclc.org/10.1177/0037768617745480.
Gervais, Will M., Azim F. Shariff, and Ara Norenzayan. 2011. “Do you believe in atheists? Distrust is central to anti-atheist prejudice.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 101, no. 6 (December): 1189-1206. 10.1037/a0025882.
Lucy Potter is a doctoral candidate in the Department of Sociological Studies at the University of Sheffield. Her research focuses on the British asylum system and cases submitted under grounds of nonreligiosity. She is an aspiring migration scholar, interested in research which intersects with asylum and human rights. Lucy is the network assistant for the Migration Research Group and a teacher of classical sociological theory.
NSRN Online 