Illegal Migration Law: Parts should not apply in NI, judge rules

Large parts of the UK government’s illegal migration law should not apply in Northern Ireland because they breach human rights laws, a judge has ruled, in a major defeat for ministers .

This is the revised post-Brexit deal agreed between the UK and the EU last year.

This decision raises important questions about the long-term viability of the plan to refuse to hear some asylum seekers and send them to Rwanda.

In his ruling, Mr Justice Humphreys also declared parts of the law incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights – an ultimate sanction from a British court that sends unworkable legislation back to the British Parliament for rethinking.

The Illegal Migration Act (IMA) 2023 is a key part of the UK government’s plan to stop people seeking asylum crossing the Channel without prior permission to arrive.

He created laws that required the Minister of Interior to detain and deport anyone arriving this way and the plan was to send them to Rwanda. That was until the Supreme Court declared last year that the country was unsafe.

This key part of the IMA has remained in limbo since then, but is widely expected to come into action as it would facilitate the transfer of people to the African nation.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said the NI court ruling would not change the government’s plan to send illegal migrants to Rwanda.

The Windsor Framework deals primarily with trade issues, but also includes a human rights element. It urges the UK not to water down the human rights provisions arising from the Good Friday Agreement, the 1998 agreement which ended 30 years of conflict in the North. Ireland, known as the Troubles.

The judge found that several elements of the law resulted in a “significant” diminution of the rights enjoyed by asylum seekers residing in Northern Ireland under the terms of the Good Friday Agreement.

“I have found that there is a significant diminution of the law in each of the areas relied on by the applicants,” he said.

Dr Tony McGleenan KC, representing the government, said an appeal could be considered.

“We will follow our instructions regarding the judgment and the position in terms of any further litigation will become clear,” he said.

The legal challenge was brought by the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission and a 16-year-old Iranian asylum seeker residing in Northern Ireland.

The commission welcomed the judgment.

He said he had filed the legal claim “on his own behalf due to his significant concerns about the Illegal Migration Act and its effect on asylum seekers in Northern Ireland”.

She said she would now “consider the judgment in its entirety and its implications”.

Mr Sunak said the court ruling does not change the government’s plan to send illegal migrants to Rwanda.

He said the government was working to get flights to Rwanda off the ground soon and “nothing will deter us from that or meet the timetable that I have set.”

He added: “We have to launch the flights to stop the boats.”

Mr Sunak also said the Government had made clear that its commitment to the Good Friday Agreement should not be interpreted as extending to issues such as illegal immigration.

“We will take all steps to defend this position, including appealing,” he said.

Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) leader Gavin Robinson said the ruling “is not a surprise” but “explodes the government’s irrational claims that the Rwanda project could also extend to Ireland North”.

He said the government must “avoid a divide in immigration policy” between different regions of the UK.

Mr Robinson said the UK Parliament should have the ability to make decisions on immigration that are “nationally enforceable”.

“If this were not the case, it would not only be a constitutional affront, but would make Northern Ireland a magnet for asylum seekers seeking to escape the authorities,” he said. declared.

The teenage asylum seeker was represented by Phoenix Law.

Its head of immigration and asylum, Sinead Marmion, welcomed Monday’s decision.

“The Good Friday Agreement has always been a beacon of human rights protection and hope,” she said.

“Today the court, through the Northern Ireland Protocol, has ensured that these rights apply to the whole community, including asylum seekers.”

Although the judgment covers issues specific to NI, it raises questions about how the courts will deal with what could be a major attack on Rwanda’s wider plan in the coming months.

This is likely to be part of a wider attack from critics who say ministers have created a series of laws under the Rwanda strategy that breach fundamental safeguards for all refugees in the UK.

The First Division Association, the union representing top government officials, is already asking judges to decide whether Rwanda’s plan requires officials to break the law.

Dozens of asylum seekers who were told they could be sent to Rwanda were also told by lawyers whether they could take legal action.