The UK High Court has ruled that part of the fast-track deportation scheme is illegal. This UK Borders Agency scheme came into effect early this year with the effect that certain categories of asylum seekers who have failed in their claims to enter or remain in the UK can be deported with little or perhaps no notice of their removal directions, which are the specific arrangements made for their removal from the State. A challenge to the scheme was taken by charity Medical Justice, which advises asylum seekers, with representation from the Public Law Project, claiming that the scheme violates, among other provisions, Articles 5, 6 and 14 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Ruling the policy as unlawful, Silber J. found a breach of the constitutional right of access to justice, which ensures that every individual must be in a position to challenge a decision in the court.
To view the case of Medical Justice, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] EWHC 1925 (Admin) 26 July 2010 in full, please follow this link.
The case of R (on the application of ZO (Somalia) and others) v. Secretary of State for the Home Department, handed down by the Supreme Court at the end of July has ruled that the UK must provide minimum standards to asylum seekers which includes the right to work, irrespective of whether their first asylum application has failed. These minimum standards are contained in the 2003 Reception Directive (2003/9/EC), Article 11 of which guarantees that access to employment cannot be withdrawn during an appeals process. The applicants in the case are asylum seekers from Somalia and Burma, both of whom had their first asylum application refused and were challenging the decision not to allow them to access the labour market.
It was argued that the Directive article governing the right to work only applied to a first application, and not to any subsequent applications. This was firmly rejected, with the Court focusing on the original intention of the Reception Directive, which is to ensure a dignified standard of living. Lord Kerr outlined that it would be "anomalous and untoward that an applicant who makes a subsequent application after his first application has been finally disposed of should be denied access to standards that are no more than the minimum to permit him to live with some measure of dignity". The Court also rejected the government's argument that to allow previously rejected applicants to work would only serve to encourage asylum seekers to repeatedly bring unmeritorious claims. The impact of this Supreme Court case means that tens of thousands of asylum seekers who are waiting for fresh applications for asylum to be processed are now entitled to fundamental rights, including the right to work.
To view the case of ZO (Somalia) & Ors, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2010] UKSC 36 (28 July 2010) in full, please follow this link.
This position can be contrasted with the current stance in Ireland, where under section 9(4)(b) of the Refugee Act 1996 individuals seeking protection in Ireland are not permitted to work while their asylum claim is being considered. Ireland and Denmark are the only two EU member states to have opted out of the Reception Directive. For further information on the current Irish law in this area, please see FLAC's Report on the Direct Provision system, "One Size Doesn't Fit All", please see attached.
Meanwhile, an Iraqi asylum seeker, Osman Rasul Mohammed, recently committed suicide following his failure to secure legal aid for his application to remain in the UK. Following a delayed payment by the Legal Services Commission, Refugee and Migrant Justice (RMJ) - the largest specialist national provider of legal representation to asylum seekers and other vulnerable migrants - went into administration in June 2010. This resulted in Osman, as one of more than 10,000 clients of RMJ, being deprived of access to legal aid and expert immigration advice. The significance of the closing of this organisation is stark when looking at RMJ's press release upon announcement of administration - "the legal representation of more than 10,000 vulnerable asylum seekers and victims of trafficking, including nearly 900 separated children, is now at risk".
For more information on Refugee and Migrant Justice, please follow this link.