Northern Ireland

Court hears ruling UK’s Illegal Migration Act should be disapplied in Northern Ireland will not be put on hold

The Act forms a key part of government plans to stop illegal migrants crossing the English Channel

Belfast High Court

A ruling that parts of the UK’s Illegal Migration Act (IMA) should be disapplied in Northern Ireland will not be put on hold, a High Court judge has confirmed.

Mr Justice Humphreys refused to grant a stay on the impact of his decision pending the outcome of a planned appeal by the government.

Declaring the original order will now take immediate effect, he said: “There is no evidence that this judgment will cause any chaos or that the interests of legal certainty are so compelling that an exceptional approach should be adopted”.

The IMA forms a key part of government plans to stop illegal migrants crossing the English Channel and deport asylum seekers to Rwanda.

Mr Justice Humphreys previously held provisions within the controversial legislation breach the post-Brexit Windsor Framework.

Join the Irish News Whatsapp channel

He ruled sections which impose a duty to remove individuals are incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and should not apply in Northern Ireland.

It followed separate challenges by the NI Human Rights Commission (NIHRC) and a 16-year-old Iranian boy who travelled to the UK alone in a bid to claim asylum.

Legal action was mounted amid claims the Act could adversely affect thousands of individuals annually by threatening their lives, dignity and liberty.

Lawyers for the Human Rights Commission argued the IMA breaches the UK’s domestic and international obligations under the Windsor Framework to ensure no diminution of rights, safeguards or equality of opportunity safeguarded by the 1998 Belfast Agreement.

Violations of a series of rights protected by the ECHR were also alleged.

The Iranian teenager, referred to as JR 295, is at a children’s home in NI after arriving in the UK on a small boat last July.

His lawyers said he is “terrified” of being sent back to Iran, claiming he would be killed or imprisoned.

In his initial ruling, Mr Justice Humphreys concluded a section of the Act which could lead to protection claims being declared inadmissible by the Secretary of State results in a “diminution of rights” under EU laws.

With the determination raising questions about plans to send asylum seekers to Rwanda, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has vowed to appeal the ruling,

The government applied for a stay on the ruling pending the outcome of its further challenge.

It was contended once the IMA comes into force there could potentially be dual and inconsistent immigration systems operating in the UK because of the disapplication in NI.

But Mr Justice Humphreys said there is still no timetable or legislative programme for commencing the provisions.

Even if the relevant sections come into operation before the appeal, he said they will take effect in NI if the government’s appeal is successful.

The judge said: “If, by contrast, the stay was granted and the statutory provisions commenced, this could cause irremediable harm to asylum seekers in Northern Ireland and to JR295 in particular.

“It could lead to removal and refoulement in circumstances where the court had ruled that these provisions were in breach of the rights enjoyed under the Windsor Framework, the Withdrawal Agreement and the Withdrawal Act.”

He added: “The respondents’ application for a stay is therefore refused and the order will take immediate effect”.