LONDON, July 10 (Reuters) - Britain acted unlawfully by removing asylum seekers' right to challenge decisions rejecting their claim to be a victim of trafficking, London's High Court ruled on Friday.
Britain's Home Office (interior ministry) last September changed its guidance relating to potential human trafficking victims, preventing someone deemed not to be a victim from challenging the decision before they were removed.
The change was introduced after a series of legal challenges to planned removals from Britain under the government's "one in, one out" deal with France, with the aim of stopping trafficking claims from blocking removals.
UK TO APPEAL AGAINST DECISION
But it was challenged by five asylum seekers who had been removed or faced removal to France, and the High Court ruled on Friday that the amended guidance was unlawful.
The court said many asylum seekers who had arrived after travelling across the Channel from France on small boats would be denied the ability to rely on key evidence when their trafficking claim was determined.
Judge Clive Sheldon noted that, in 2025, 79% of people who were initially deemed not to be a victim of trafficking received a positive decision on reconsideration.
The Home Office said it planned to appeal against Friday's ruling, with a spokesperson saying in a statement: "Last-minute modern slavery claims must not be used to frustrate the removal of illegal migrants."
Lawyers representing some of the asylum seekers who brought the challenge welcomed the ruling, but said many people had already been unlawfully removed to France.
The ruling is a setback in the government's attempts to cut illegal migration, which is one of the most contested issues in British politics, eclipsing concerns over a faltering economy.
Arrivals via small boats and the housing of asylum seekers in hotels have become particular focal points, at times fuelling protests and community tension.
Britain's Labour government has sought to tighten immigration policy to counter Nigel Farage's populist, anti-migration Reform UK party, though this has alienated some left-wing supporters who advocate safe routes for asylum seekers.
One of the five claimants involved in the High Court case, who was returned to France and was granted anonymity by the court, which is routine in asylum cases, said they had experienced "a feeling of hopelessness".
"When a lot of individuals enter the United Kingdom to seek refuge, and have experienced a lot of difficult situations, being further mistreated is simply heart-breaking," they said in a written statement.
"The overwhelming sentiment is that they do not treat people equally," they added. "Some people they place in hotels, some they return to France, like me."
(Reporting by Sam Tobin; Editing by Andrew Heavens)
