News

• Analysis: Government defies protests in bid to uphold section 55 of Asylum Act
• Asylum seekers win human rights battle with government
• Special report on warnings that law change will leave asylum seekers destitute

Refugee campaigners have expressed their bitter disappointment at the Court of Appeal’s ruling that an asylum seeker forced to sleep rough after being denied government support did not suffer inhuman or degrading treatment, writes Clare Jerrom.
 
The Malaysian asylum seeker, known as ‘T’ in court, slept rough at Heathrow airport, west London for over five weeks after he was denied assistance from the National Asylum Support Service because he failed  to apply for asylum for six days after his arrival in the UK.

Lord Justice Kennedy said it was “impossible” to find ‘T’s condition had reached or was verging on the inhuman or degrading because he had “shelter, sanitary facilities and some money for food”.

“He was not entirely well physically, but not so unwell as to need immediate treatment,” he added.

Home office minister Beverley Hughes welcomed the ruling for clarifying that “a claim of destitution will not necessarily be a deciding factor” in deciding cases under Article 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights.

But the Refugee Council’s director of development, Anna Reisenberger, slammed the ruling and said it was “a disappointing result” for the thousands of asylum seekers it affects.

“Though the courts have already ruled that denying asylum seekers support can lead to a breach of their human rights, this remains a grey area in the law that will only be ultimately resolved when the government repeals this harsh and inhuman measure,” she added.

The home secretary’s appeal was against Mr Justice Kay’s high court ruling in July that the human rights of three asylum seekers had been breached when they were forced to sleep rough after being denied Nass assistance for failing to make their asylum claim immediately.

Although the home office immediately said it would appeal against Kay’s ruling, before the judgement this week it dropped two of the cases.

It acknowledged that ‘D’ had claimed asylum ‘as soon as reasonably practicable’ as stated under Section 55 of the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act and was therefore entitled to support, and ‘S’ was sufficiently ill that his human rights would be breached if support was not offered.

“The government conceded that the two out of the three claimants were driven to surviving in such appalling conditions that it amounted to a breach of their human rights under Article 3,” said a Refugee Action spokesperson. “It cannot be good law which so repeatedly risks human dignity by denying support where it is so vitally needed.”

She added that asylum seekers denied support under Section 55 should be given the right to appeal at an independent NASS tribunal.

Homelessness charity Shelter restated its call for the immediate repeal of Section 55. Director, Adam Sampson, said: “If the government fail to rethink this brutal legislation some very vulnerable people will face a harsh and desperate winter.”