Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood is reportedly set to accelerate deportations of foreign criminals and rejected asylum seekers, stripping them of the ability to use human rights legislation to delay their removal until after they have left the country.
Drawing on powers first introduced under Sir Tony Blair during an earlier migration crisis in the early 2000s, the Express understands Mahmood intends to certify asylum claims as “unfounded” and remove people immediately — confining any appeal to a process conducted from their home nation rather than from British soil. Crucially, those deported under the scheme have no right to appeal against their removal before it takes place.
According to reports, a record 104,400 rejected asylum seekers are currently lodging appeals against removal — nearly double the figure from a year ago — with large numbers housed in hotels and other taxpayer-funded accommodation while their cases grind through the system.
The move comes as Ms Mahmood seeks to contain a threatened rebellion by dozens of Labour MPs opposed to her wider crackdown on migration — a package that will also force legal migrants and refugees to wait longer before qualifying for permanent residence in the UK.
Twenty-five countries are said to have been assessed by officials as sufficiently safe to permit immediate deportation without prior appeal. The list spans several continents and includes India, Brazil, Nigeria, Kenya, Ghana, Albania and Ukraine — nations that between them accounted for more than 14,000 failed asylum seekers and foreign criminals last year, among them 4,000 Indian nationals, 2,700 Nigerians and 1,750 Albanians.
Alex Norris, the border security and asylum minister, told The Telegraph: “A firm and fair approach to immigration does not mean hard-working taxpayers provide for individuals with refused human rights claims, many of whom are vile criminals.
“That is why we are scaling up the use of these powers to deport more foreign national offenders to their home countries, where their appeals can be heard. We will not hesitate to remove incentives which draw people to the UK illegally, and we will increase removals in order to restore order and control the border.”
Ministers have described both the deportation crackdown and the wider migration reforms as a “firm but fair” way to tackle the migration crisis and save the UK billions of pounds.
How the system works
Once a claim is certified as “unfounded” under section 94B of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002 — the Blair-era legislation being dusted off for this purpose, according to the Telegraph — the individual’s right to taxpayer-funded accommodation and support is immediately rescinded. They have no right to appeal against their removal and are offered a voluntary departure package covering flights and travel documents. Refusal triggers enforced removal.
The legislation allegedly contains a critical safeguard: deportation can only proceed where there is no “real risk of serious irreversible harm” upon return to the individual’s home country. The 25 designated countries have all been cleared on that basis.
A crackdown on the ‘carousel’
A Home Office insider described the initiative as among the most significant tightening of deportation policy in recent memory, arguing it would dismantle the “carousel” of repeated appeals that has allowed thousands to remain in the country indefinitely, states the Telegraph. The source acknowledged one vulnerability in the system — the risk that individuals granted bail ahead of removal flights might abscond before they can be put on a plane.
The figures underline how far standards have slipped. The number removed without appeal climbed 50 per cent to 8,476 last year, but that is equivalent to just 10.6 per cent of the 80,000 people whose asylum claims were rejected — a fraction of the 22 per cent achieved under Blair in the early 2000s, when close to 20,000 people a year were removed without appeal. Blair had set an explicit target for monthly removals to outpace new unfounded asylum claims by the end of 2005.
Labour rebellion
The Express has reported on how the policy has unsettled significant numbers of Labour backbenchers, with dozens of MPs openly opposed to Ms Mahmood’s crackdown. The wider reforms — which will require legal migrants and refugees to wait longer before qualifying for permanent residence — have added further fuel to the discontent.
Angela Rayner, championed by the Labour left as a potential leadership contender, attacked the plans last week as “un-British” and said they had pulled “the rug” from underneath hard-working families. Ministers have pushed back, describing the overall approach as “firm but fair.”
Imran Hussain, director of external affairs at the Refugee Council, said: “The Government’s own figures show that up to two in every three asylum appeals are successful. That means many people who are initially refused are later recognised by the courts as refugees.
“Forcing people to leave the UK before they have had the chance to appeal flawed decisions risks sending men, women and children back to situations where they may face real danger.
“If the Government wants to restore confidence in the asylum system, the priority should be improving the quality of initial decision-making. Getting decisions right first time would reduce the number of costly appeals, clear the backlog more quickly, and cut the need for expensive and unsuitable asylum accommodation.”
