header-logo header-logo

Windrush reforms reviewed

19 October 2018
Categories: Legal News , Immigration & asylum
printer mail-detail

MPs and Peers on the Joint Committee on Human Rights are to examine proposed Home Office reforms to immigration detention made in response to the Windrush detention scandal.

The Home Office proposals, published this week, include piloting a scheme to manage in the community individuals who would otherwise be detained at Yarl’s Wood Detention Centre, increase use of face-to-face meetings to identify vulnerabilities and resolve potential problems, and reassess its adult at risk policy.

The Home Office has also set up the Windrush Taskforce, which has issued more than 2,300 documents confirming status and enabled more than 2,100 individuals to become British citizens.  

Members of the Windrush generation, who migrated to the UK before 1973, including Anthony Bryan and Paulette Wilson, were wrongly detained and deported due to Home Office errors. Both Bryan and Wilson had indefinite leave to remain in the UK but did not have the correct documents to confirm their status.

Home Secretary Sajid Javid has personally apologised to those affected.

Harriet Harman MP, Chair of the Joint Committee, which will begin its inquiry at the end of this month, said: ‘The wrongful detention of Anthony Bryan and Paulette Wilson were not simply “mistakes” but systemic failures in the system, so the apologies to them from the Home Office in this response to our report were necessary. 

‘Our Committee will closely examine the government’s outlined proposed reforms to the immigration detention system during our upcoming inquiry. For example, we’ll look at the piloting of an automatic bail referral system after two months and the idea of increasing the size and scope of the system for checking detention decisions, and whether these, amongst the other proposals, go far enough to address the current problems in the system.

‘We will also examine the case for time limits on immigration detention and, if indefinite detention is to end, how this should work in practice when we examine the evidence in coming weeks.’

The Home Office has also commissioned an independent review into the scandal, which is due to report back by 31 March 2019.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll