The Weekly Round-Up: High Court looks at section 3C leave; Biden imposes restrictions on asylum seekers in USA
10 June 2024
In UK news
A group of UN experts has expressed concern regarding deception and exploitation faced by migrants coming to work in the UK. The Seasonal Worker Scheme, put in place to cover labour shortages in the UK, has been criticised for creating conditions where deception, exorbitant recruitment fees, debt bondage, undignified living conditions and potential deportation are widespread. This is due to some recruitment agencies charging illegal recruitment fees, sometimes thousands of pounds, so migrants are frequently in debt even before they arrive in the UK. Once in the UK, they may find that there is no work for them, fewer hours than promised, or they may be forced to work in exploitative conditions. As the migrants’ visas do not allow them to change employers within the UK, many remain working under such conditions due to the threat of being removed from the UK. The Bureau of Investigative Journalism has published recent investigations on the hostile and humiliating working conditions faced by agricultural labourers and care workers, arguing that in some cases their treatment amounts to modern slavery.
In international news
President Biden has imposed strict new measures allowing officials at the Southern Border of the USA to turn away asylum-seekers. The Presidential proclamation states that when border crossings exceed the threshold specified by the President (currently 2,500), asylum seekers who cross the border without permission will be barred from applying for asylum until border crossings drop below a seven-day average of 1,500. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has announced that they are launching a legal challenge against the new measures.
Ambassador Ammar Hijazi, representing Palestine, has sought to intervene in the case between South Africa and Israel at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). He argues that Palestine has the right to intervene under Article 62 of the Statute of the ICJ, which provides that a state may apply to intervene in a matter if it considers that it has a legal interest in the case. He also argues that the Palestinians whom he represents are permitted to intervene under Article 63, which provides that every state notified of a pending convention concerning them is permitted to intervene in proceedings. The United Kingdom does not recognise Palestine as a state.
The US House of Representatives has passed a Republican bill, with support from some Democrats, sanctioning the International Criminal Court (ICC), after ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan KC applied for arrest warrants for, among others, Israeli officials PM Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant. The Illegitimate Court Counteraction Act sanctions any foreign individual who directly or indirectly aids the International Criminal Court in investigating, arresting, detaining or prosecuting “protected persons”, that is US officials or the officials of US allies, in particular Israel. The sanctions laid out in the bill are property blocking (i.e. blocking and prohibiting all transactions in all property and interests in property), imposing inadmissibility for visas to the USA and revoking current visas to the USA.
In the courts
The High Court has held that the Home Secretary acted unlawfully in failing to provide immigrants with documentary proof that they are legally in the UK under “section 3C leave”. Section 3C of the Immigration Act 1971 provides that where an immigrant with leave to remain in the UK makes an immigration application before the expiry of their leave, they may lawfully remain in the UK until the Home Office finishes processing their application. Processing for some immigration applications can take months or even up to a year. During this time immigrants lawfully in the UK can have difficulty accessing employment, housing or medical care due to the “compliant environment” policies. The High Court held that the Home Secretary’s failure to provide digital evidence of section 3C leave was irrational: “The underlying purpose of the legislative framework is that there should be a hostile and unwelcoming environment for those who are unlawfully present and so who are undocumented. The corollary of this is that those who are lawfully here should not face the hostile environment. That can only happen if they are documented”. The court also held that the Home Secretary breached his duties to promote the welfare and best interests of children impacted by section 3C leave.
The High Court has reiterated once again that duties under the Children Act 2004 apply to all children in the UK, no matter their immigration status, and Kent County Council cannot derogate from these duties with regard to unaccompanied asylum seeking children. Kent County Council is struggling to accommodate the many unaccompanied children arriving in the UK after travelling across the English Channel. Until last year the unaccompanied children were accommodated in hotels, until the High Court found that this practice was unlawful. Kent County Council issued what it called “section 11 notices” stating that it cannot safely accommodate the children. The court held that there was no statutory basis for using section 11 of the Children Act 2004 to “attenuate” duties to accommodate children under the act; instead section 11 “imposes an obligation to make arrangements for ensuring that Kent CC’s functions are discharged having regard to the need to safeguard and promote the welfare of children”.
