Women forced into marriage overseas asked to repay costs

[userschmoozer]

www.theguardian.com/society/2019/jan/02/women-forced-into-marriage-overseas-asked-to-repay-cost-of-return-to-uk

Women who escape forced marriage are forced to hand over their passports until they have repaid the loan.
''Four young British women imprisoned and tortured at a “correctional” religious school in Somalia ahead of expected forced marriages told the Times they each had to pay £740 to return home, where the burden of the loans...contributed towards them becoming destitute.''

The original report is in the times but behind a paywall and I don't have a share token.

Is there a crowdfunder setup to get them safely home?

I heard about this on Today this morning. Women are not allowed to get a new passport until the loan is repaid but are not able to get a job without proof of their right to work (i.e. a passport for most people). It is shocking yet simultaneously not at all surprising. According to the FCO it's ok because the terms of the loans they have to repay are better than private loans. I feel they may have somewhat missed the point there...

The statement read out on Radio 5 this morning said that they had to ask the women to pay the money back because it was public money. Is that true of all public money that is spent by foreign offices? I bet not.

Link to the original Times article:

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/forced-marriage-victims-charged-fee-to-be-rescued-jmnx88hxg?shareToken=47fe7d6230a037384ff4858bcc7f4891

Thank you welshgendercrit , thats a better article than the Guardian.

I'm pleased to see The Times has reported on this as a leading article;

''The Times view on Foreign Office policy for repatriation: Paying for Release''
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-times-view-on-foreign-office-policy-for-repatriation-paying-for-release-gh7wrvbmw

The Times has done a lot of articles in recent months about forced marriages and honour killings, so this is obviously an area of real concern to them. I first took out a Times digital subscription to follow their Brexit coverage, but stayed for the gender criticism and other areas of social concern.

This is disgraceful. The costs should be imposed on the people who sent them there in the first place if they need to be recouped. Perpetrators of the criminal act should be made to pay. It might act as a deterrent to parents who do this if they know that they may have to pay repatriation costs. They are the criminals, after all.

Unfair .

I too think that the perpetrators should have the charge put against them wherever possible.

Another vote for perpetrators being pursued for costs.
Forced into marriage, forced into debt when neither should be tolerated.

I don't have an issue with the government recouping costs in some situations like this. I don't think it's the taxpayer's job to necessarily fund every repatriation. But those costs should be recouped by the people who sent them in the first place, not the innocent victims FFS!

Fucking outrageous.
I saw it too.
What are they thinking?
Have they an understanding of whether the costs have meant that women didn't take the help? > Or don't they have records of reports vs women taken home?

I was properly flabbergasted at this.

The women in Somali had been chained up and flogged FFS they were imprisoned and brutalised > UK women > who are told no we won't help you unless you cough up?
Then they take their passports away.

It's a travesty IMO.

I'm reassured to see that British women under 18 years are repatriated for free.

Oh that's good where did you see that?
If it's on BBC I missed it maybe has been updated.

I am baffled generally by the response from govt that it's great value as cheaper than a bank loan or whatever it was. Ridiculous. They aren't buying a sofa FFS they're trying to escape sexual slavery / imprisonment etc

Oh osrry it's right there on op guardian link!

"In March 2017, the Foreign Office announced it would amend its repatriation policy so that British 16- and 17-year-olds who got into difficulty abroad would no longer have to reimburse the government the costs of their journey home. The policy is still in place for people aged 18 and over."

I had only read bbc earier & before thread so didn't read link in op as well

"Got into trouble abroad" is a fucking weird way of describing being taken from the UK to be forced into marriage

Under 16 are not mentioned?

Very upsetting.

So the foreign office previously reviewed this and decided to waive for victims of forces marriage (aka "getting themselves into trouble abroad") for 16 and 17 so it's not like this has been off the radar, they reviewed and actively decided to continue to apply these charges to women over 18 who are British citizens and illegally kidnapped and prob raped etc.

The costs are about £10K a year whoop de doo yes that seems totally worth recouping from these women. And taking their passports is awesome given that presumably it will be exactly what their captors did too

Forced!

Not forces!

It’s horrific, isn’t it. I’m so glad the Times is making a lot of noise about this. Absolutely unforgivable.

They say that it’s the same fee as anyone else is charged for repatriation, but most other people who need repatriating haven’t been the victims of a criminal plot to imprison them and quite possibly torture and rape them too. Most other people who need repatriating will have freely chosen to go where they went and will have taken out travel insurance which will cover the cost. Most people who need repatriating will have a job back home and/or family members who can help them out.

Whereas these are young women still in education who’ve been illegally imprisoned in horrific circumstances, sometimes for years, who clearly have no job, no home, whose families are the very ones who put them in that position so clearly have no family support either. It’s absolutely mind-boggling that the Foreign Office could think this was a fair comparison.

Given that these women are victims of a criminal act that was conceived and initially executed in the UK (with the parents tricking the young women into travelling, and presumably paying these “re-educators” for their services) I can’t see how there is the remotest justification for this. The parents should be having the shit prosecuted out of them and all reimbursement should be coming from them/their assets.

Or we could just scrap the whole idea of charging victims of crime for being rescued from the criminals.

It is such a shame that such good work is being done in rescuing girls and young women from FM but that it is fouled up like this in conclusion. I very much hope the Times’ reporting brings about a change here.

Even when its bloody obvious you’re british the draconian new rules make it impossible to get a job without a passport. How are these women supposed to earn the money to pay back the government?

Forced marriage carried a penalty of up to 7 years in prison, but it seems to be rarely prosecuted.
I wonder how many victims of crime are penalised in this way?

Dunno

Seems with this one the authorities have realised that if it's a crime involving a woman, likely to be young, and sex, then actually its her own fault and she should be punished.

She failed to protect herself and got in trouble overseas.

Only herself to blame.

Why should taxpayer bail her out.

Etc.

Essentially blocking subsequent employment is to add insult to injury.

Once again punishing those vulnerable without a voice, it's disgusting!