In a pivotal ruling at the Belfast High Court on Monday, Mr Justice Michael Humphreys determined that a substantial portion of the UK government’s Illegal Migration Act, which authorises the eviction of asylum seekers perceived to have entered the UK unlawfully, should not be enforced in Northern Ireland. The judgement was due to the fact it infringes upon human rights secured in the post-Brexit Windsor Framework pact.
The Belfast Agreement’s commitment to a society grounded in rights for all inhabitants of the North forms the backbone of the pact’s Article 2.
The UK legislation controversially includes a plan to relocate certain asylum seekers to Rwanda, although this is governed by a different law that recognises Rwanda as a safe nation.
Furthermore, the Belfast court identified parts of the act that conflict with the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
The Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission and a 16-year-old Iranian asylum seeker, who arrived in Northern Ireland in August of last year via a small boat to Kent and was relocated by the UK Home Office under the UK’s National Transfer Scheme, were the plaintiffs in the lawsuit. The boy, who arrived after the implementation of the law, was alarmed by the potential consequences of being transferred once he turned 18.
The legal representative of the adolescent asylum seeker, Sinéad Marmion from Phoenix Law in Belfast, described the judgement as being of significant importance, stating that it could lead to profound implications for Downing Street. She expressed how this could completely disrupt the UK government’s leading policy of not dealing with asylum claims but instead focusing on removal.
The verdict offers distinct protection for migrants in Northern Ireland that differs from the rest of the UK. The claims of asylum seekers will now have to be substantively handled by Stormont.
The judgement was well-received by the Northern Ireland Human Rights Commission, explaining that they initiated the legal challenge due to their grave doubts about the Illegal Migration Act and its impact on asylum seekers in Northern Ireland. They are currently reviewing the judgement in detail and its effects.
Immigration solicitors based in the north of the UK have dismissed the notion that there has been a spike in asylum seekers relocating to the Republic to evade the UK’s policy towards Rwanda, stating that such claims are unverifiable and, in their experience, unfounded. Immigration specialist Marmion, who represents over a thousand clients, believes that a recent court decision in Belfast dispels the belief that individuals were crossing the border to evade Rwanda.
Marmion stated that any such migration motivation ceased to exist “from this point onward”, adding that the theory held no merit and she held doubts about any related figures from the outset.
What are politicians’ views on the matter?
The DUP expressed concern that Northern Ireland could become a “hub for asylum seekers looking to avoid enforcement” and urged the UK government to ensure that the same immigration regulations are implemented uniformly across the UK.
The party’s interim leader, Gavin Robinson, raised concern that the court ruling might lead to the institution of an “immigration boundary” in the Irish Sea. UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, however, remained steadfast, saying the judgement would not alter his government’s intention to deport undocumented immigrants to Rwanda.
Sunak emphasised the government’s commitment to launching flights to Rwanda soon, stating that “nothing will sidetrack us from this or from adhering to the schedule I have established”. He further emphasised on the importance of commencing the flights to put an end to boat migrations.
Could the court ruling open the door to future legal challenges?
It’s a possibility. According to Úna Boyd, a Belfast-based immigration attorney, if it were determined that immigration laws conflict with the Windsor Framework, the Good Friday Agreement (GFA), or the ECHR – which are all integrated into the GFA – then such legislation would need to be rescinded throughout the UK.
Boyd emphasised that although Northern Ireland has unique protection, if it precipitates the repeal of aspects of the Illegal Migration Act, it could lead to improved protective rights for everyone living in the UK.