Monitoring and evaluation of remote medico-legal report assessments when documenting evidence of torture for asylum seekers detained on Diego Garcia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7146/torture.v36i1.159649Keywords:
medico-legal assessment, remote assessment, detention facilitiesAbstract
Introduction: Between 2022 and 2023, Freedom from Torture (FfT) produced remote medico-legal reports for 19 asylum seekers unlawfully detained on Diego Garcia (DG), an island in the Chagos Archipelago. To ascertain clinical challenges and the effectiveness of remote assessment of evidence of torture for individuals held in quasi-detention on DG, as compared to non-detained UK-based individuals. In early 2020, FfT audited telephone assessments of individuals in the UK to assess the extent to which they can safely evaluate evidence of torture. Results were published in the Torture Journal (Cohen et al., 2021). Methods: Between 2020 and 2021, we conducted a further audit of appointments with individuals in the UK by (i) video assessment only, (ii) a combination of video and face-to-face assessments, and (iii) face-to-face assessment only. We collected structured feedback from doctors following video assessments with individuals on DG. We compared this with the feedback from previous audits. Results: Doctors carrying out DG video assessments felt less able to make a full assessment of the impact of torture or to complete a full psychological assessment, compared with assessments of UK-based individuals. They were less able to obtain as full an account and establish rapport. Substantially more challenges and safeguarding concerns were reported. Conclusion: Remote medico-legal assessments of asylum-seekers held in detention-like circumstances are less likely to be able to fully document and evaluate evidence of torture than remote assessments of asylum-seekers not in conditions of detention. Our study had several limitations; however, we set out principles we believe may be of use to others conducting remote assessments.
References
All-Party Parliamentary Group on Immigration Detention (2021). Report of the Inquiry into Quasi-Detention. https:// appgdetention.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/211209APPG-on-Immigration-Detention-Report-of-Inquiry-intoQuasi-Detention.pdf Cohen, J., Gregory, B., Newman, K., Rowe, E., & Thackray, D. (2021). Remote medico-legal assessment by telephone during COVID-19: Monitoring safety and quality when documenting evidence of torture for UK asylum applicants. Torture Journal, 31(1), 37–52. https://doi.org/10.7146/torture.v31i1.121832 Febles Simeon, O., & Cuneo, C. N. (2023). Remote evaluations for humanitarian parole of asylum seekers to the United States – The case of MA. Torture Journal, 33(1), 119–122. https://doi. org/10.7146/torture.v33i1.134905 Galán Santamarina, A., González Sanguino, C., López Neyra, G., & Pérez-Sales, P. (2023). Exploratory study on the quality of forensic assessments using the Istanbul Protocol in a virtual versus face-to-face environment. Torture Journal, 33(1), 32–40. https://doi.org/10.7146/torture.v33i1.131491 Mishori, R., Hampton, K., Habbach, H., Raker, E., Niyogi, A., & Murphey, D. (2021). “Better than having no evaluation done”: A pilot project to conduct remote asylum evaluations for clients in a migrant encampment in Mexico. BMC Health Services Research, 21, 508. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/ s12913-021-06539-5 Nelson, B. (2023, December 18). New asylum processes set up on disputed territory of Diego Garcia. Free Movement. https:// freemovement.org.uk/new-asylum-processes-set-up-on-disputedterritory-of-diego-garcia/ Pogue M., Raker E., Hampton K., Saint Laurent M.L., Mishori R. Conducting remote medical asylum evaluations in the United States during COVID-19: Clinicians’ perspectives on acceptability, challenges and opportunities. J Forensic Leg Med. 2021 Nov;84:102255. doi: 10.1016/j.jflm.2021.102255. Epub 2021 Sep 23. PMID: 34607249; PMCID: PMC8475638. Schippert, A. C. S. P., Grov, E. K., & Bjørnnes, A. K. (2021). Uncovering re-traumatization experiences of torture survivors in somatic health care: A qualitative systematic review. PLoS ONE, 16(2), e0246074. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0246074 Shaw (2016), Review into the Welfare in Detention of Vulnerable Persons: A Report to the Home Office. Appendix 5: The impact of immigration detention on mental health: A literature review, by Mary Bosworth, PhD, Professor of Criminology. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/ media/5a8024f940f0b62305b89713/52532_Shaw_Review_ Accessible.pdf Steel, Z., Silove, D., Brooks, R., Momartin, S., Alzuhairi, B., & Susljik, I. (2005). Impact of immigration detention and temporary protection on the mental health of refugees. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 188(1), 58–64. https://doi. org/10.1192/bjp.bp.104.007864 The King (on the application of VT) (Sri Lanka) v Commissioner for the British Indian Ocean Territory BIOT SC 15 & 16 2023 (2024). Available at: https://www.biot.gov.io/wp-content/ uploads/VT-et-al-v-BIOT-Commissioner-Unlawful-DetentionApproved-Judgment-161224.pdf The Commissioner for the British Indian Ocean Territory v The King (on the application of VT & Ors) (No. 3) (Rev 2) [2024] BIOT CA (Civ) 3. https://www.biot.gov.io/wp-content/ uploads/FINAL-2024-BIOT-CA-Civ-3-JUDGMENT-FORHAND-DOWN-Rev-2.pdf United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). (2022). Manual on the effective investigation and documentation of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (Istanbul Protocol) (Rev. 2, Publication No. HR/P/ PT/8/Rev. 2). United Nations. https://www.ohchr.org/en/ publications/policy-and-methodological-publications/istanbulprotocol-manual-effective-0 UNHCR (2024). Monitoring Visit to Diego Garcia, 18 - 26 November 2023. Dated 16th February 2024. [Unpublished]
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Torture Journal
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
We accept that some authors (e.g. government employees in some countries) are unable to transfer copyright. The Creative Commons Licence Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) covers both the Torture Journal and the IRCT web site. The publisher will not put any limitation on the personal freedom of the author to use material contained in the paper in other works which may be published, provided that acknowledgement is made to the original place of publication.
