Recurring concern

Failure to provide accessible deportation information to detained prisoners

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

First reported 19 Dec 2018•Latest report 26 Jan 2022

Definition

What this concern includes

Includes failures in the deportation-information and documentation process affecting detained prisoners or deportation-process subjects, including insufficient information, inaccessible legal language, absent translation or plain-English assistance, and failure to provide information in a form the recipient can understand and use.

Not included

  • Excludes general immigration or deportation case-processing delays, appeal evidence-gathering and placement decisions where accessible information provision is not the unsafe condition.
  • Excludes generic interpreter or translation-service deficiencies without a deportation-information context.
  • Excludes legal merits, entitlement or fairness of a deportation decision where the information and documentation process itself is not deficient.
  • Excludes prison information and advice unrelated to deportation proceedings.
Reports
2

Distinct published reports

Individual concerns
2

A report can raise multiple concerns

Date range
2018–2022

First to latest report issue date

Stated actions
4

Described in published responses

Reports over time

Reports over time

Reports about this concern issued each year.

* 2026 is projected from reports observed to 7 Sep 2026.

Most frequent recipients

Most frequent recipients

Reports about this concern sent to each recipient.

Home Office2
Ministry of Justice1

Concerns and responses across reports

Only concerns grouped under this recurring concern are included. Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

  1. West London

    AI-generated summary

    Ketheeswaran KUNARATHNAM · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Ketheeswaran KUNARATHNAM, a refugee detained at HMP Wormwood Scrubs after completing a prison sentence, was found hanging in his cell on 23 February 2018; the inquest concluded suicide. The report identified shortcomings in communication, record keeping, risk assessment, healthcare checks, prison procedures and the timeliness of immigration responses. It also raised concerns about detained prisoners receiving insufficient accessible information and support regarding their immigration and legal matters.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Lack of accessible information and advice for detained prisoners facing deportation

    Wider context from the report

    “During the inquest it became apparent that a certain number of prisoners in HMP Wormwood Scrubs were detained for deportation reasons after the conclusion of their prison sentence. There seemed to be a marked disparity between the information and advice available to a detained prisoner, compared with a free individual or one in a deportation centre. There was a paucity of available information and the letters sent out by the Home Office were written in legal English with no offer of translation or “plain English” assistance. Individuals in the community could access the internet, Law centres, citizens advice or any other sources of assistance that were not available to detained prisoners due to the restrictive regime, putting them at a disadvantage. ”

    Source location

    Ketheeswaran KUNARATHNAM · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 2 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Explain and signpost deportation processes, possible claims, evidence sources and legal assistance throughout the deportation process.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “In your report, you specifically highlighted an inability to access the internet, Law Centres, Citizens Advice or any other sources of assistance for those detained in a prison. We recognise that not all FNOs will be legally represented and therefore throughout the deportation process we will seek to explain and signpost appropriately whether through written documents or direct engagement. The deportation notice informs the FNO why deportation is being considered and invites the person to provide any reasons why they consider it should not be pursued. A statement of reasons accompanies this decision, clearly setting out examples of possible claims, including those protection and human rights based, which could be raised alongside possible sources of supportive evidence.”

    Source location

    2022-0030-Response-from-Home-Office
    Page 2 · response
    Published 3 February 2022

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Maintain dedicated immigration officers embedded in prisons to induct foreign national offenders and record accessible interaction information.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “We have considered the concerns you have raised as to the effectiveness of in person engagement with immigration officials in Mr Kunarathnam’s case. The Home Office understands that in person contact with individuals subject to deportation action is hugely important. A dedicated team of immigration officers embedded in the prison estate carry out that engagement and endeavour to induct an FNO soon after they arrive at a prison. This induction seeks to explain the deportation process, obtain basic person details and any vulnerabilities or medical conditions. The induction process is periodically reviewed, and the interactions are now recorded and accessible to other Home Office officials on internal databases.”

    Source location

    2022-0030-Response-from-Home-Office
    Page 2 · response
    Published 3 February 2022

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Launch an FNO Information Hub to provide shared signposting resources supporting preparation for release or removal.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “Communications are also more appropriately documented. Immigration officers embedded in prisons now ensure all conversations are recorded and where appropriate signed by the FNO. Digitalisation improvements have allowed for engagements with FNOs to be raised on internal databases along with any vulnerability concerns promptly after interactions, while Immigration Officers have access to a Ministry of Justice system, to ensure immigration contact and records are widely shared. At HMP Wormwood Scrubs, immigration officers now have access to the HMPPS database where relevant information is also accessible. To further strengthen collaborative working an FNO Information Hub has been launched which will pave the way for a digital platform and sharing forum for both Home Office and HMPPS users which aims to provide signposting resources to prepare FNOs for their release or removal.”

    Source location

    2022-0030-Response-from-Home-Office
    Page 3 · response
    Published 3 February 2022

    Open published response

    Source evidence

    How this respondent position was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Prison access to 30 minutes of legally aided immigration advice provides a functional equivalent to the service available in immigration removal centres.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “These notices signpost Civil Legal Advice (and Scottish and Northern Ireland equivalents); an organisation which can provide information on legal aid if a person is unable to pay for a legal representative. A published list of legal aid providers is available from the Legal Services Commission. Removal paperwork reminds the person of the same. Additionally, in November 2021, HM Prisons and Probation Service (HMPPS) issued an instruction which allows all individuals held under immigration powers in a prison, access to 30 minutes of legally aided immigration legal advice. This provides a functional equivalent to the service currently available in IRCs.”

    Source location

    2022-0030-Response-from-Home-Office
    Page 2 · response
    Published 3 February 2022

    Open published response

  2. Liverpool and the Wirral

    AI-generated summary

    Michal Piotr Netyks · Prevention of Future Deaths report

    This summary was generated using AI from the published report. Please read the original report for the complete account.

    Report summary

    Michal Piotr Netyks, a Polish national serving a custodial sentence at HMP Altcourse, died after jumping head first from first-floor railings on 7 December 2017, the day he was due to be released but was instead detained under immigration powers. The report identifies concerns about the timing and explanation of the immigration detention paperwork, access to legal advice and support, the prison railings, and aspects of the Home Office’s handling of the case.

    Read the report on judiciary.uk

    Source evidence

    How this individual concern was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Failure to provide deportation documentation in a form understandable to subjects with limited written English

    Wider context from the report

    “D. In this inquest the Home Office were given the status of interested persons from an early stage. The Court has been greatly assisted by counsel and instructing solicitors acting for the department along with two witnesses. It was evident and unhelpful that the Home Office did not have a senior manager present throughout the proceedings to assist the court on procedures, if only by way of liaison. The inquest is not an immigration appeal tribunal and yet on evidence received it is more likely than not that Mr Netyks was exercising Treaty rights through employment and family life in North Wales. It appeared unfair that an incarcerated subject of the deportation process was required to provide evidence of the exercise of Treaty rights when the Home Office Caseworker could easily have made a check with the employer or HMRC for corroboration of his appeal against the stage one process. This is particularly concerning given English was a second language and all documentation was only provided in English. The facility to appear to speak and understand English is not the same as being able to comprehend the written word. This apparent unfairness could be addressed by the issue in B above, or by immigration officers explaining such documentation. ”

    Source location

    Michal Piotr Netyks · Prevention of Future Deaths report
    Page 3 · concerns

    Open source report

    Source evidence

    How this respondent action was interpreted

    PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

    PFD Monitor interpretation

    Issue a staff notice requiring use of the Big Word translation service when language barriers arise.

    Verbatim wording from the response

    “The Director at HMP Altcourse has also implemented a number of measures to ensure that when prisoners are told of immigration decisions of continuing detention, these are communicated effectively and in a way that minimises the prisoner’s distress and that their risk of suicide and self-harm is assessed as part of this process. All prisoners are now informed of such decisions in a private office, by the Foreign National Lead, or if not available, by a Safer Custody first line or cluster manager, with a wing manager present. Any increased risk or concern can then be assessed and ACCT procedures instigated if necessary. NOMIS is updated with a record of the conversation including that a risk assessment has taken place. A Notice to Staff has been issued reminding staff that the Big Word translation service must be used where there are any language barriers.”

    Source location

    2018-0393-Response-by-HM-Prison-and-Probation-Service
    Page 2 · response
    Published 17 May 2019

    Open published response
Back to top

Data last updated 7 September 2026