header-logo header-logo

12 May 2021
Categories: Legal News , Immigration & asylum , Judicial review
printer mail-detail

Home Office immigration plans ‘confused’, say Bar Council & Law Society

The Bar Council has slammed radical Home Office proposals to reform immigration law as based on ‘thin or non-existent’ evidence.

The government consultation on its New Plan for Immigration includes proposals for a ‘one-stop process’ for immigration claims with ‘all protection-related issues’ to be presented at the start of the process, an expedited claims and appeals process, and a pre-approved panel of experts.

Responding to the consultation last week, the Bar Council said the time allowed for responses was ‘seriously inadequate’, and the proposals for expediting claims and appeals were ‘confused’, lacked detail, and raised concerns about the potential risk of unlawfulness. 

The proposal for judges to decide refused claims, with no right of appeal, lacked detail, but assuming that it relates to challenges which are currently brought as judicial reviews, then there were already short limitation periods for judicial review, the Bar Council pointed out. It described the use of pre-approved experts as ‘unprincipled and deeply inimical to a fair appeals process’. It said the suggestion that a party acting in an appeal against a Home Office decision before an independent judge could be constrained to instruct a pre-approved expert ‘fundamentally undermines the right to a fair hearing’.

Law Society president I Stephanie Boyce said the plans ‘pose a serious threat to the rule of law as well as undermining access to justice and making a mockery of British fair play.

‘The proposals individually and collectively lack credibility because they are not supported by evidence, detail and perhaps―most damningly―they muddle immigration, asylum and nationality laws.’

She highlighted that the 1951 Convention on Refugees recognises that those fleeing persecution may have to use irregular means of travel and should not be penalised for this.

‘Penalising asylum-seekers who reach our shores by so-called irregular routes, such as by boat, would overturn this principle and risk breaching international law by creating a two-tier asylum system. The government appears not to appreciate the severity of this risk.’

Boyce said: ‘The proposals seek to push asylum-seekers who reach the UK by irregular routes into destitution or homelessness as a way of coercing them to leave the country.’

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Ward Hadaway—Nicola Williams

Ward Hadaway—Nicola Williams

Specialist tax expertise expands with partner appointment

Howard Kennedy—Caroline Urban

Howard Kennedy—Caroline Urban

Firm strengthens corporate and capital raising specialism with partner hire

Payne Hicks Beach—Lucas Moore

Payne Hicks Beach—Lucas Moore

Commercial disputes partner succeeds Robert Brodrick as chair of management board

NEWS
Global mobility is transforming family law, creating new challenges around jurisdiction, assets and child arrangements
The civil justice landscape could be heading for a shake-up, with reform of the Solicitors Act 1974 gathering pace
Employers are being urged to prepare now for far-reaching employment law changes taking effect in January 2027
As family structures evolve, the law may face difficult questions about inheritance rights for those in polyamorous relationships
A series of procedural developments could have significant practical consequences for litigators. Writing in NLJ this week, columnist Stephen Gold highlights important updates ranging from digital court reforms to family procedure and admissions of liability
back-to-top-scroll