Asylum woes at the Home Office

The recent debacle over the attempted removal – and swift return to the UK – of 40 Iraqi failed asylum seekers highlights deep-rooted problems at the UK Border Agency (UKBA).

The first is incompetence. This was a high-profile test of the ability of the agency to carry out forced removals to the main part of Iraq. It is incredible that better arrangements were not made to ensure that the flight went smoothly. Instead, it is reported that once the 99 security guards and 40 failed asylum seekers reached Baghdad, a Kalashnikov-toting Iraqi army officer allowed those who wanted to come home to do so and sent the rest back.

Well, I say “incredible” but what I actually mean is “wholly predictable”. Immigration lawyers are accustomed to dealing with inept decisions which are routinely overturned on appeal, but recent court cases and reports by the chief inspector of UKBA show that the ineptitude cuts both ways. Some cases are granted that should not be. No one was less surprised than immigration lawyers by the foreign prison deportation scandal that hit the Home Office in 2006. We imagined our letters and correspondence to the Home Office disappearing down the back of an enormous sofa at immigration HQ in Croydon. It turned out that letters from prison governors suggesting the Home Office might want to consider deporting dangerous foreign criminals nearing the end of their prison sentences were also disappearing down the back of the same giant sofa. The Home Office was and remains dysfunctional, or, in the famous words of then home secretary John Reid, “not fit for purpose”.

The second problem is a profound lack of understanding or respect for the rule of law at all levels of UKBA. Six Iraqis were taken off the removals flight because they had managed to get in touch with good lawyers. A high court judge was persuaded that the flight might be unlawful because the route and destination were unknown and Iraq is a highly unstable country, as the appalling recent bomb attacks and interviews with those who did return to Iraq vividly demonstrate. The flight was no less unlawful for the other Iraqis yet UKBA went on regardless, simply because the other Iraqis did not manage to get a lawyer. Some may disagree with the refugee convention and human rights law, but they are the law of the land and while they remain so they must be respected.

But like an unruly toddler, the Home Office believes that what matters is whether they are caught, not what the rules are. Time and time again the Home Office is found to be acting unlawfully: on prolonged unlawful detention, secret policies, misleading the courts and failure to respect court judgments in the last fortnight alone. Substantial compensation is paid to some of the victims as a result. What UKBA fails to appreciate is that there are many, many more victims whose rights are violated but who never manage to secure the protection of the rule of law.