The Bar Council has expressed serious concerns about government plans to replace the first-tier immigration tribunals decided by judges with an independent immigration appeals authority made up of trained lay people.
As the House of Commons debates the Immigration and Asylum Bill (second reading), the Bar Council, which represents the 18,000+ barristers in England and Wales, is urging MPs to rethink plans to allow people with no legal qualifications to decide on appeals.
Appeal decisions to be made by the new body include matters such as protection claims (eg in relation to refugee status), human rights (eg family life matters), and citizenship (eg Withdrawal Agreement EU citizens’ rights and decisions on deprivation of British citizenship). The Bar Council argues that it is in the interests of justice that those who decide immigration appeals be legally qualified – a principle previously agreed through the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999.
The Bar Council warns that having adjudicators with no legal qualification deciding appeals increases the risk of material legal error in the decisions made, potentially resulting in additional costs to rectify them.
The Bar Council has also raised concerns of bias in the plans for adjudicators to be appointed by the Home Secretary, reversing a decision in 1987 to transfer the appointment of adjudicators from the Home Secretary to the Lord Chancellor. It is not in the public interest for the Home Secretary to appoint the persons who decide appeals to which they are a party.
Commenting, Kirsty Brimelow KC, Chair of the Bar Council, said:
“There is no convincing justification to remove the requirement for those who decide immigration appeals to be legally qualified. Rather than speeding up decisions, the proposals introduce the very real risk of legal error, resulting in further delay and cost.
“We agree with the government that it is vital the public has confidence in the immigration and asylum system. But we question whether these proposals, sponsored by a minister who is a party to every immigration appeal, pay the necessary respect to the principle of the separation of powers and the need to ensure the independence and impartiality of those persons deciding immigration appeals.
“We ask the government and MPs of all parties to rethink these proposals.”