Home Office hurdles

April 9, 2015

Unfortunately, Miwa Hirono has become the victim of Daily Mail-peddled nationalistic, anti-immigrant, political ideology, which has Home Office staff lawyers obliged to appeal every immigration tribunal success (“Migrant scholars’ ‘precarious and temporary’ status will cost UK dear”, Opinion, 26 March).

The foolproof way that the lawyers have found to do this is to state, as clearly was done in Hirono’s case, that the judicial decision-maker has not clearly identified the reasons for their decision. If my students can clearly see the reason for the decision, surely these well-paid Home Office lawyers can – but by appealing on these grounds, they can guarantee returning the case to the courts. What the Home Office hopes will happen is that the people who are fighting for their right to stay will run out of energy and (more to the point) the money to continue their fight, and will return to their home countries.

Only those fortunate, “unfortunate few”, asylum seekers – whose only form of income is food vouchers and so who qualify for some form of legal aid – can conceive of continuing the endless battle. They then have to go through an appeal hearing in order to seek permission to further appeal their application to stay in the UK to what is known as the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber), but which in reality is a subset of the Supreme Court. If they get that far, they will discover that quite often the Home Office will then give up – not wanting the costs of the specialist barristers needed to fight a case in the Supreme Court – and find a basis upon which the person can stay in the UK.

We are seeing that, without any oversight, the rule of law and any idea of justice are being undermined repeatedly by this current government. The real question is whether any post-election regime will have the guts to shelve this dishonesty from the Home Office, respect the decisions made in the immigration tribunal, and treat applicants with the fairness that the rest of us expect from our justice systems.

Stephen Whittle
Via timeshighereducation.co.uk

Times Higher Education free 30-day trial

You've reached your article limit

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments
Register

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Featured Jobs

Post-doctoral Research Associate in Chemistry

University Of Western Australia

PACE Data Support Officer

Macquarie University - Sydney Australia

Associate Lecturer in Nursing

Central Queensland University
See all jobs

Most Commented

women leapfrog. Vintage

Robert MacIntosh and Kevin O’Gorman offer advice on climbing the career ladder

Woman pulling blind down over an eye
Liz Morrish reflects on why she chose to tackle the failings of the neoliberal academy from the outside
White cliffs of Dover

From Australia to Singapore, David Matthews and John Elmes weigh the pros and cons of likely destinations

Mitch Blunt illustration (23 March 2017)

Without more conservative perspectives in the academy, lawmakers will increasingly ignore and potentially defund social science, says Musa al-Gharbi

Michael Parkin illustration (9 March 2017)

Cramming study into the shortest possible time will impoverish the student experience and drive an even greater wedge between research-enabled permanent staff and the growing underclass of flexible teaching staff, says Tom Cutterham