Government Plans for Asylum Appeals: A Critical Look
The government is proposing important changes to the asylum appeals system, aiming for faster decisions through a new, autonomous appeals body. This plan, they state, is driven by a desire for efficiency and is informed by models in other European countries.
Though, legal experts raise concerns about the feasibility and legality of this approach. While establishing specialist judicial bodies isn’t inherently problematic – examples like the investigatory Powers Tribunal and the Special Immigration Appeals Commission already exist – the core principle of judicial oversight remains crucial. Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights guarantees a fair hearing by an independant and impartial tribunal,and this right extends to having decisions reviewed by a court.
The government acknowledges the current system struggles with increasing demand, even with increased tribunal sitting days. The question remains: will a new, specialized body truly resolve this, or simply shift the bottleneck? The plan’s success hinges on finding a sufficient number of “independent professionally trained adjudicators.” Concerns are raised about the potential source of these adjudicators – will they come from existing tribunals, already stretched thin, or even from the Home Office itself, perhaps creating a conflict of interest given the high rate of overturned decisions?
While limiting judicial review has been attempted before, outright removal of court oversight in contentious areas has historically faced legal challenges.The government is also reviewing Article 8 of the Human Rights Convention (right to private and family life),but the results of that review aren’t expected for some time.
Ultimately, the government’s plan lacks crucial details. Until a convincing explanation is provided for how this new body will overcome existing challenges and maintain essential legal safeguards, skepticism remains warranted.
