Lawyers to be prevented from delaying deportations
LAWYERS will be prevented from using judicial reviews for “hopeless” cases in order to frustrate attempts by the Home Office to deport immigrants, The Sunday Telegraph can disclose.
A Government source said: “It will end the industrial use of judicial review to the High Court with hopeless claims that have already been adjudicated by tribunal judges which frustrate removals at the last minute.”
Robert Buckland will say on Thursday that the Government wants to stop the automatic referral of judicial review cases to senior judges.
The reform plans are expected to be the first salvo from the Government in a major crackdown on so-called “meritless” immigration and asylum claims expected in coming weeks.
An official review has found that out of 5,500 judicial review cases since 2012, just 12 (0.2 per cent) were successful. The vast majority were immigration and asylum cases.
The Government is expected to consult on ways to stop lawyers appealing immigration rulings through the different levels of courts on hopeless cases.
One plan would see lawyers prevented from launching judicial reviews of Upper Tribunal immigration decisions. A new law will be passed to overturn a 2012 Supreme Court ruling which allowed these cases to be subject to judicial review. Officials said the ruling had delayed the swift processing of immigration and asylum cases, with last-minute legal challenges causing delays and leaving the Home Office unable to remove people with no right to be in this country. A government source said: “It is clear from the panel’s findings the courts have got things wrong.
“The judicial review process is vital to protect the rights of individuals, but it is equally important that it is not open to abuse, used to conduct politics by other means, or to create needless delays. What we have seen here is a reversal of a decision taken by elected politicians that has led to significant delays and people with no right to remain in the country avoiding removal. That is simply not right.”
The results of the investigation into judicial reviews, chaired by Lord Faulks QC, was launched last July. It will report this week. It was considering whether the right balance was being struck between the rights of citizens to challenge executive decisions and the need for effective and efficient government.