Published on 15/05/2024
The United Kingdom’s law to deport asylum-seekers shouldn’t apply in Northern Ireland because parts of it violate human rights protections, a Belfast judge ruled Monday.
Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission Responds to Illegal Migration Act Judgment
The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission welcomes today’s judgment.
The High Court found that a number of provisions in the Illegal Migration Act breached the UK’s obligations under Article 2(1) of the Windsor Framework and the European Convention on Human Rights.
Read Also: UK’s Rishi Sunak: Migrants Going To Ireland Shows Rwanda Plan’s Deterrent Effect working
The Windsor Framework guarantees that following Brexit there will be no diminution of rights protected by the Belfast (Good Friday) Agreement. The Court has disapplied in Northern Ireland those provisions of the Illegal Migration Act which breach the Windsor Framework. It has also declared a number of the provisions incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights.
The Commission issued this legal challenge in its own name due to the significant concerns it has with the Illegal Migration Act and the effect on asylum seekers in Northern Ireland.
We will now be considering the judgment in full and its implications.
Notes to editors
- In September 2023, the Northern Ireland Human Commission issued a legal challenge against the Illegal Migration Act (IMA) 2023 in the form of a judicial review at the High Court in Belfast. This challenge was against the Secretary of State for the Home Department and Secretary of State for Northern Ireland.
- The Commission issued legal proceedings as a last resort. It argued that once the IMA provisions come into force, they will have a very harmful effect on most asylum seekers who seek refuge in Northern Ireland, removing the ability to claim asylum except in very limited circumstances. In particular there would be a failure to protect some of the most vulnerable people including children and victims of human trafficking and exploitation.
- The Commission decided to issue the challenge due to the significant human rights implications the IMA will have for asylum seekers in Northern Ireland, in particular the barriers created for individual legal challenges removing the ability to appeal and judicially review decisions in most circumstances.
- The Commission had raised concerns about the compatibility of the legislation with the UK Government’s human rights obligations during its passage through Parliament. The Commission made recommendations to the UK Home Office, which were not followed, and the Bill received Royal Assent on 20 July 2023.
- Summary of judgment here.
Read Also: UK’s Rishi Sunak: Migrants Going To Ireland Shows Rwanda Plan’s Deterrent Effect working
The Illegal Migration Act was incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights and undermines rights provided in the Good Friday peace agreement of 1998, High Court Justice Michael Humphreys said.
U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said that the government would appeal the judgment.
The law is central to Sunak’s contentious plan to deport some migrants to Rwanda, but it wasn’t immediately clear what impact the ruling would have on that initiative.
While the prime minister’s office said the ruling wouldn’t derail or delay Rwanda deportations that the U.K. government says will begin in July, a lawyer whose client prevailed in bringing the case said the law wouldn’t apply in Northern Ireland.
“This is a huge thorn in the government’s side,” attorney Sinéad Marmion said. “There’s a huge obstacle in the way of them being able to actually implement that in Northern Ireland now.”
The law was created to deter thousands of migrants who risk their lives crossing the English Channel to claim asylum in the U.K. by creating the prospect that they would be sent to the east African country. It allows those who have arrived illegally to be deported to a “safe” third country where their claims can be processed.
While the U.K. Supreme Court struck down flights to Rwanda, because it said that the nation was unsafe, a subsequent bill pronounced the country safe, and that makes it harder for migrants to challenge deportation. It also allows the U.K. government to ignore injunctions from the European Court of Human Rights that seek to block removals.
Humphreys found that parts of the law violated human rights protections of a post-Brexit deal signed between the U.K. and European Union last year. That agreement, known as the Windsor Framework, said that it must honor the peace accord that largely brought an end to the Troubles — 30 years of violence between British unionists and Irish nationalists.
The leader of the Democratic Unionist Party said that the U.K. government had been repeatedly warned that its immigration policy wouldn’t apply in Northern Ireland, because it was incompatible with the post-Brexit agreement with the E.U.
“Whilst today’s judgment does not come as a surprise, it does blow the government’s irrational claims that the Rwanda scheme could extend equally to Northern Ireland completely out of the water,” DUP Leader Gavin Robinson said.
Sunak said that the Good Friday agreement wasn’t intended to be “expanded to cover issues like illegal migration.”
The law was challenged by the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission and a 16-year-old Iranian boy who crossed the English Channel last year without any parents and claimed asylum in the U.K. The boy, who is living in Northern Ireland, said he would be imprisoned or killed if he’s sent back to Iran.
The judge placed a temporary stay on the ruling until later this month.
Read Also: UK’s Rishi Sunak: Migrants Going To Ireland Shows Rwanda Plan’s Deterrent Effect working
SOURCES: NEWS AGENCIES
