Home secretary unlawfully cut trafficking protections to enable ‘one in one out’ asylum deal, judge rules | UK news

A high court judge has ruled that the home secretary’s decision to reduce protections for potential trafficking victims to allow a “one in, one out” asylum return deal to continue was unlawful.

The legal challenge was brought by five small boats of asylum seekers leaving to return to France, four from Eritrea and one from Sudan. This was related to a change in guidance regarding the one-on-one out plan; This meant that those denied trafficking protection no longer had the right to have it reconsidered.

In a lengthy judgment published on Friday morning, Mr Justice Sheldon found that Shabana Mahmood’s decision regarding the guidance was unlawful.

However, other elements regarding the individual decisions taken by the interior minister regarding five cases were found to be lawful.

The judge found that the decision to change the trafficking guidelines to prevent reconsideration of cases that had initially been decided negatively had made a “real difference” in two of the asylum seekers’ cases, but not in the other two cases.

All five asylum seekers were given permission by the judge to continue their legal claims.

The decision is likely to have significant consequences, given that many asylum seekers arriving on small boats have the potential to become victims of trafficking, particularly if they have passed through Libya on their journey to the UK.

The one-for-one deal involves a person traveling from France to England on a small boat being forcibly returned to France in exchange for another asylum seeker in France who did not attempt to cross the Channel.

Mahmood changed the guidance to re-evaluate smuggling in a bid to speed up the return of some small boats arriving in France.

More than 1,000 people are likely to be sent to France under the program since it started last August. Many later disappeared. Hundreds of people who came by small boat are waiting in detention centers in England to be forcibly returned to France.

The interior minister argued that their cases could be heard in France because France is party to agreements protecting victims of human trafficking. However, the court heard evidence that trafficking victims who were not French or not trafficked in France did not receive the same protections in France. In the UK, all victims of trafficking are entitled to the same protection.