The Bill seeks changes to the immigration system for asylum seekers and refugees, by introducing a two-tier system for arrivals that treats them differently according to how they got here. It also changes the definition of ‘refugee’, appears to amend the criminal offence of illegal entry to cover asylum seekers who arrive without leave to enter, introduces accelerated detained appeals and gives tribunals powers to fine legal representatives.
Law Society president I Stephanie Boyce said the proposal on appeals might amount to a ‘new “detained fast track” procedure, which was twice found to be unlawful because it was deemed “structurally unfair”’. It ‘could have serious consequences for access to justice,’ she said.
The proposal to allow tribunals to fine lawyers risked ‘creating a conflict of interest if solicitors are to be held personally liable for costs for reasons outside of their control,’ she said.
‘Solicitors are fundamentally obliged to act in their clients’ best interests, which may involve adjourning a case due to a change in circumstances which they are not at liberty to disclose. They are subject to a rigorous regulatory regime and shouldn’t be penalised for the clients they represent.’
Boyce also warned of ‘significant concerns’ the Bill may not comply with the UK’s obligations under the 1951 Refugee Convention and would not provide access to justice for extremely vulnerable people.
‘The UK’s commitment to international agreements we sign up to is key to the country’s reputation, to attracting business to the UK and to maintaining faith in our justice system,’ she said.
‘Put it another way―a country seeking to negotiate new trade deals around the world is not putting itself in a strong position by bringing its word on past agreements into question.’
