Law lords deliver asylum blow
The law lords have today ruled the government is wrong to deny benefits to asylum seekers who fail to claim them on arrival.
It marks the end of a three-year battle between the law lords and the Home Office – who had appealed against a previous rejection of the policy.
The measure was first introduced in 2002 and has been championed by successive home secretaries, who argue that the policy helps stop bogus asylum seekers.
Home secretary Charles Clarke appealed against an earlier Court of Appeal decision last May, which had also declared that the policy violated human rights laws.
However, the law lords ruled today such a policy was unfair and that it caused unnecessary destitution.
“I have no doubt that the threshold [of suffering] may be crossed if a late applicant with no means and no alternative sources of support, unable to support himself is, by deliberate action of the state, denied shelter, food or the most basic necessities of life,” said Lord Bingham.
The ruling was welcomed by campaigners, who have long argued that “section 55” of the immigration act- as that part of the asylum policy is known – was unlawful.
Maeve Sherlock of the Refugee Council said: “We are delighted with this unanimous judgment. It was disgraceful that vulnerable refugees were left to starve on the streets.
“Section 55 brought immeasurable harm to many innocent refugees who were guilty of nothing more than asking for protection here.
“Thousands of people, who arrived here scared, alone and traumatised, were refused basic food and housing by this unjust law and forced to sleep rough on British streets.”
And shadow home secretary David Davis said the ruling was “another blow for the government’s shambolic immigration policy”.
“If they had any kind of workable system to deport failed asylum seekers rather than just strip them of their benefits, they wouldn’t find themselves in this mess,” he added.
But immigration minister Tony McNulty defended the government, although he did concede that it would now consider changing the rules.
He said: “The judgment leaves intact a fundamental principle within our approach to asylum which is that people should claim as soon as they arrive in the country.
“The law lords have recognised that there are difficult decisions to be made and each case has to be judged on its individual merits.
“We will study very carefully their judgment and consider whether we need to make any adjustments to our existing procedures and processes.”
