BID Statement on the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill
As we continue to scrutinise the Bill over the coming weeks, we highlight our initial key concerns in advance of the second reading.
On 30th January, the government introduced the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill to Parliament, accompanied by a written statement from Home Secretary Yvette Cooper.
The Bill makes some much-welcome changes to past legislation under the previous government. The cruel Safety of Rwanda Act has been repealed in entirety, as have a number of provisions under the Illegal Migration Act (IMA) that undermined the right to seek asylum safely in the UK.
We do, however, have a number of serious concerns about some new measures introduced by the Bill, and some provisions under the IMA which have not been repealed. While we will continue to scrutinise the Bill in detail over the coming weeks and months, we would like to highlight our initial key concerns in advance of the upcoming second reading (10th February).
The Bill does not repeal Section 12, 29 and 59 of the IMA.
- Section 12 weakens judicial scrutiny of immigration detention, placing the decision on what is a reasonable period of detention at the discretion of the Secretary of State.
- Section 29 excludes anyone with a criminal history from protections related to trafficking, including survivors of modern slavery.
- Section 59 makes human rights and asylum claims automatically inadmissible from a number of countries including Albania, India and Georgia, where there are significant issues of human trafficking, blood feuds, persecution of LGBTQIA+ people and other human rights abuses.
These provisions should be repealed, and we would urge Parliament to repeal the entire IMA on the grounds that it was in danger of breaching the European Convention of Human Rights and thus is not sound.
Of serious concern, clause 50 of the Bill enables Crown Courts to impose orders upon people acquitted of criminal offences where a court is ‘satisfied’ that the person has been involved in ‘serious crime’. Such orders may include ‘prohibitions, restrictions or requirements’ and ‘such other terms’ the court thinks may be needed to prevent serious crime. The broad framing of this power is deeply concerning.
The Bill also expands detention powers pending deportation through Clause 41, and risks further criminalising refugees and migrants making dangerous journeys through the introduction of new offences relating to immigration crime.
“Whilst the new Bill makes a start on changing some of the inhuman aspects of the asylum system in the UK, we remain concerned over certain provisions. We would like to highlight in particular the extended power to detain, the exclusion of people who have been trafficked from protection, the effective punishment of people who have been acquitted of crimes and the prosecution of people seeking safety in the UK.
Ultimately, the Bill does nothing to change the hostile narrative on migration and asylum which has grown over recent years. The government needs to prioritise working towards a just, efficient and humane immigration and asylum system, with human rights at its core.” Charlotte Buckley, BID Director.
