Conservative Proposals Spark Outcry Over Judicial Powers in Asylum Appeals
Refugee organizations and legal professionals have strongly criticized Conservative plans to remove judges' authority to decide on asylum seekers' appeals against deportation, describing the move as "an attack on the concept of justice and equality under the law."
In a speech delivered on Tuesday, the shadow home secretary, David Lammy, outlined that a Conservative government would withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and dismantle the judicial tribunal system currently used by claimants to challenge their removal.
Under the proposed changes, immigration decisions would be handled exclusively by the Home Office, according to Tom Philp, the Conservative immigration minister. This would introduce a rapid internal appeal process for migrants. Additionally, Philp stated that legal aid would be eliminated for all immigration cases.
Concerns Raised by Human Rights Advocates and Legal Experts
The policy has elicited strong disapproval from human rights advocates and legal professionals. Sile Reynolds, head of asylum advocacy at Freedom from Torture, remarked:
"Philp’s proposals are nothing short of an attack on the concept of justice and equality under the law.
For [survivors of torture] and all those seeking protection, the consequences of a wrong decision can be fatal. The independent appeal process and access to effective legal advice are crucial safeguards that stop the government wrongly sending them back into the hands of their torturers."
Imran Hussain, director of external affairs at the Refugee Council, emphasized the removal of democratic safeguards, stating:
"No British government should be free to mark its own homework when it comes to people questioning unlawful actions."
Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, warned that abolishing immigration tribunals would eliminate independent oversight:
"This right is central to our justice system and essential for those of us seeking safety. Judges can only act within the law and to accuse them of bias when they cannot respond is damaging and unfair."
The Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association (ILPA) accused Philp of fostering hostility toward legal professionals and the judiciary:
"An independent legal profession and judiciary are fundamental to our democracy … We are therefore extremely concerned that once again senior politicians appear to be fostering a climate of hostility towards immigration practitioners and judges."
Philp Criticizes Judiciary and Details Tory Immigration Plans
Speaking at the right-leaning thinktank Policy Exchange, Philp criticized the current legal framework, stating that the UK has "created a legal system in immigration that hands near-unlimited power to judges to decide individual immigration cases and also the power to shape how the whole system operates through case law."
He accused some members of the judiciary of collaborating with "open border campaigners" and cited a judge who granted the right to live in the UK to an individual applying under a scheme originally intended for Ukrainian refugees.
"These cases show immigration tribunal judges handing down decisions that fly in the face of common sense, but they are enabled by the current system," Philp said.
Philp also referenced a judge who allowed an Albanian burglar with 50 convictions to remain in the UK, commenting on the severity of the offenses:
"So if your house is broken into by an Albanian burglar, you know which judge you can thank for that."
According to Philp, the Tory plans would prevent the vast majority of individuals entering the UK illegally—such as via small boats or hidden in lorries—from making asylum claims.
However, Philp stopped short of endorsing Reform UK's position, which proposes disregarding the principle that prohibits returning individuals to countries where their life or freedom would be threatened.
"If a determination was made that [asylum seekers] were genuinely at acute risk in that country of origin … there would be a power for the home secretary to send to a safe third country like Rwanda," he said. "But I would expect the vast majority of cases of illegal immigrants, to entail return to their country of origin."
Government and Opposition Responses
Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood is planning to replace the existing two-tier tribunal system with a single independent appeals body designed to expedite case processing.
Meanwhile, Reform UK has proposed legislation that would bar the Home Office, immigration tribunals, and higher courts from considering asylum claims from individuals who have entered the UK through illegal routes.
