UK Parliament reactions to the case of Syrian journalist Zaina Erhaim

The case surrounding the confiscation of Syrian journalist Zaina Erhaim's passport by the UK Home Office has garnered significant Parliamentary engagement. On 22 September, Syrian journalist and critic of the Syrian regime, Zaina Erhaim had her passport taken from her at Heathrow airport.  She was told that this was because the Syrian government said that it was stolen.  

On 18 October, Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson responded to a question from Liberal Democrat MP Alistair Carmichael about the case. 

Mr Alistair Carmichael (Orkney and Shetland) 

One of the many barriers to creating safe routes out of Syria is the Syrian Government’s practice of declaring stolen passports belonging to those who oppose them. Will the Foreign Secretary, as a matter of some urgency, speak to his colleague the Home Secretary about the position of Zaina Erhaim, an award-winning Syrian journalist who recently had her passport confiscated as she came into Heathrow?

Boris Johnson

I am aware of the case. It is very difficult, because we must, in law, confiscate passports that have been stolen, but we are doing what we can to assist the lady in question.

Alistair Carmichael MP is also the primary sponsor of an EDM on Syrian passports (Early Day Motion 562). It has also been sponsered by a cross-party group of MPs - Stephen Gethins (SNP), Helen Goodman (Labour), Mark Durkan (SDLP) and Peter Bottomley (Conservative). 

Zaina Erhaim's case was raised in a Parliamentary debate on Aleppo and Syria on 11 October by the Liberal Democrats' Foreign Affairs Spokesperson Tom Brake MP. He said:

"On the reporting of what is happening in Syria, I draw Members’ attention to the case of Zaina Erhaim, an award-winning Syrian journalist who had her passport removed by the British Government when she arrived in the UK. Apparently, the Syrians reported that her passport had been stolen. Given that we think Syria is a pariah state committing crimes against humanity, the fact that we would act on a request from it to seize someone’s passport is bizarre. I hope the Foreign Secretary can explain why that action was taken."

On 7 October, Conservative MP Heidi Allen wrote a Parliamentary Question to the Foreign Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what reports he has received on the case of the Syrian journalist, Zaina Erhaim.

Foreign Office Minister Tobias Ellwood replied:

My officials have been in contact with the UK Border Force about this case. We are aware that the passportpresented by Zaina Erhaim has been retained by UK Border Force officials. The passport was listed on an international database as lost or stolen. In such circumstances the Border Force will confiscate the document. Since the passport is listed as lost or stolen, it is no longer valid for travel to the UK or elsewhere and as such the Border Force is not able to return the passport to Ms Erhaim. The passport is therefore being retained by the British authorities.

Labour MP Paula Sherriff has also written two questions (first and second) to the Home Office about Syrian passports:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many Syrian passports have been returned to the Syrian government on the basis that they have been reported stolen by that government.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many passports have been confiscated from Syrian citizens by UK officials in 2016 on the basis of being stolen.

 

Following a press conference at Caabu (details about which are outlined below), there were press reports about Zaina's case in the Independent, Al Jazeera, International Business Times, Press Gazette and Middle East Eye

Press conference at Caabu with a coalition of other organisations

On 13 October, Caabu hosted a press conference in conjunction with Index on Censorship, Reporters Without Borders, the Institute for War and Peace Reporting and the Frontline Club. More information about it can be found here.

They gathered to hear and discuss the pressing situation surrounding Zaina Erhaim, the award-winning Syrian journalist who had her passport confiscated by the Home Office on 22 September 2016 after it was declared ‘stolen’ by the Syrian government. What does this case mean for Zaina, critics of the Syrian regime and dissidents of other governments around the world?

Zaina, normally raising the plight of other Syrians and the situation in her country, found herself having to raise her own case, in light of the Home Office’s decision to confiscate her passport on 22 September, a decision which effectively renders her stateless. The authorities did so based on a declaration by the Syrian government that her passport was stolen. Zaina, an award-winning journalist who has worked extensively in Syria, and is targeted by the Syrian regime as a result of her brave work, was coming to the UK to speak at an event organised by Index on Censorship. The UK authorities have accepted Zaina is who she is, but have bought into the narrative claimed by the Syrian government that she has stolen her own passport. It is a troubling and baffling scenario which puts Zaina at great risk and sets extraordinary precedent, in which any government, from China to Iran, could essentially declare the passport of any dissident as ‘stolen’.

Despite this ordeal, Zaina considers herself lucky. She possesses another passport, speaks fluent English, and is well supported by other activists and organisations. She is still not optimistic about her passport being returned, and at the time of the press conference had not been contacted by any government official.  If her passport is not returned, the implications are severe. She would likely be separated from her family based in Turkey, unable to be let back in without a passport or exit stamp. And if let in, she would only have access to a refugee card, meaning she would be subject to limited rights, unable to work. Zaina, who desperately wants to return to her family in Turkey, may be forced to apply for asylum.

The case shows that despite the strong rhetoric against the Syrian regime, the UK is still dealing with them on a practical level. It is a peculiar situation in which the government condemns the situation in Aleppo, while restricting a journalist who has actually worked there. Despite the regime wanting Zaina dead, the UK are essentially taking their word at face value. It is unlikely that this is an intentional decision, with the Home Office likely following some dated letter of the law, but they have not considered the political context, and they must adapt to reality.

As such, Zaina and the NGOs supporting her case do not just want the return of her passport, but a significant rule change to end this loophole, for both other Syrians and dissidents around the world. Zaina noted similar cases of other Syrians who have applied for visas in the UK and have been denied entry at the request of the Syrian government. Many Syrians simply do not own passports and so find themselves in vulnerable positions. Applying for or renewing passports in Syria is extremely dangerous, subject to the quims of a brutal Syrian regime. 

As Reporters without Borders argued, the issue is also indicative of press freedom in the UK more broadly, with the country ranked only #38 out of around 170. The case of Chinese artist Ai Weiwei was raised, in which he was only given a short visa because he had a ‘criminal record’ as a result of his activism in China. This decision was overturned quickly.  It is unclear as to whether the Home Office will correct their decision with Zaina’s case, but it is vital that as much noise is made as possible. MPs and Ministers have been reached out to, and there has been considerable press coverage.