MPs call for rethink on asylum aid
Proposed restrictions on legal aid for asylum appeals could lead to a “denial of justice”, MPs are warning.
Under new rules due to come into force on April 4, lawyers would not be paid until after an appeal case is heard and in most cases only if the appeal was successful.
But a report by the Constitutional Affairs select committee today says this policy is likely to discourage lawyers from taking on cases unless they were certain to win.
The MPs say the aim of ending the funding of “frivolous” asylum appeals was “laudable”, but urge the government to “re-think” its position.
Committee chairman Alan Beith said: “The Government has set the bar too high on this occasion.
“No-one would argue that frivolous asylum and immigration cases should be funded by the public purse. However, these proposals swing too far in the other direction.”
He said that few solicitors were likely to take on cases if there was a significant chance that they would not get paid at the end, particularly those from small firms or charities.
“Discouraging solicitors and barristers from taking on all but the most cast-iron cases could amount to a serious denial of justice. The Government must re-think its position,” Mr Beith added.
Chief executive of the Refugee Council, Maeve Sherlock, welcomed today’s report and urged the Government to take note of its “persuasive and forceful conclusions”.
“By making it harder for asylum seekers to get legal representation, and therefore get a fair hearing on their claim, there is the very real risk that people will be returned to their country of origin to be tortured or killed,” she said.
Ms Sherlock added that if the Government wanted to cut the number of asylum appeals it should focus on improving the way decisions were made in the first place.
