header-logo header-logo

Immigration Bill human rights warning

27 March 2019
Issue: 7834 / Categories: Legal News , Immigration & asylum , Human rights , EU
printer mail-detail

The Immigration Bill removes the rights of EU citizens in the UK after Brexit with no guarantee of replacement, MPs and Peers have warned.

In its current version, the Bill provides that it will be up to the Home Secretary to reinstate these rights via secondary legislation. In a report published this week, the Human Rights Committee contends that this leaves families in too precarious a situation regarding their housing, social security and other free movement rights. They propose a series of amendments to enshrine protections and guarantees in the Bill.

Harriet Harman MP, the Committee’s Chair, said: ‘EU citizens living in this country right now will be understandably anxious about their futures.

‘We’re talking about the rights of people who have resided in the UK for years, decades even, paying into our social security system or even having been born in the UK and lived here their whole lives. When it comes to rights, promising that everything will be worked out in the future is not good enough, it must be a guarantee, which is why the Committee have reinserted rights guarantees back into the wording of the Bill.’

The Committee also raises concerns about the lack of physical proof of status given to individuals registering under the EU Settlement Scheme. It says that, unless the Home Office ensures physical proof is provided, individuals could suffer problems similar to those endured by the Windrush generation.

It argues that the rights of individuals who may have lived and worked in the UK their whole lives should not depend on their registering with a scheme within a specific time limit.

The Committee also wants to UK and Irish governments to clarify the rights of Irish citizens post-Brexit, with a view to continuing existing arrangements.

Issue: 7834 / Categories: Legal News , Immigration & asylum , Human rights , EU
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Pillsbury—Peter O’Hare

Partner hire bolstersprivate capital and global aviation finance offering

Morae—Carla Mendy

Morae—Carla Mendy

Digital and business solutions firm appoints chief operating officer

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Twenty Essex—Clementine Makower & Stephen Du

Set welcomes two experienced juniors as new tenants

NEWS
The High Court’s decision in Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys has thrown the careers of experienced CILEX litigators into jeopardy, warns Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers in NLJ this week
Sir Brian Leveson’s claim that there is ‘no right to jury trial’ erects a constitutional straw man, argues Professor Graham Zellick KC in NLJ this week. He argues that Leveson dismantles a position almost no-one truly holds, and thereby obscures the deeper issue: the jury’s place within the UK’s constitutional tradition
Why have private prosecutions surged despite limited data? Niall Hearty of Rahman Ravelli explores their rise in this week's NLJ 
The public law team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer surveys significant recent human rights and judicial review rulings in this week's NLJ
In this week's NLJ, Mary Young of Kingsley Napley examines how debarring orders, while attractive to claimants seeking swift resolution, can complicate trials—most notably in fraud cases requiring ‘particularly cogent’ proof
back-to-top-scroll