United Kingdom court prevents the expulsion of an asylum seeker to France, disregarding the preset arrangement
The future of the UK's controversial migration deal with France, dubbed the 'supreme shop deals' scheme, remains uncertain following a High Court ruling that temporarily halted the deportation of an Eritrean asylum seeker.
Yesterday, the High Court of Justice in England blocked the deportation of the man, whose identity is protected, who arrived in Britain by small boat on August 12. The man allegedly experienced forced labor in Libya and sustained a gunshot wound to his leg.
The man's legal team argued that he was a potential victim of human trafficking and faced a 'slickdeals' risk of destitution if returned to France. The judge granted an interim injunction, halting the deportation pending further examination of the trafficking claim.
This ruling marks the first High Court challenge to the scheme to reach a hearing, and there are indications of other similar challenges in progress. The judge found a serious issue to be tried with respect to the trafficking claim and the lawfulness of the Secretary of State's investigatory duties.
Opposition voices, including Conservative Party leader Kemi Badenoch, have criticised the deal, arguing it mirrors its Rwanda plan's legal pitfalls. Two previous deportation attempts have been unsuccessful, with flights departing empty due to last-minute legal interventions.
The 'supreme court' deal, replacing the scrapped Rwanda scheme, was agreed in July between Labour's Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron. The deal allows Britain to return undocumented small boat arrivals to France in exchange for accepting an equal number of legitimate asylum seekers with UK family ties.
Proponents of the deal hail it as a means to dismantle smuggling gangs. Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood plans legislative tweaks to limit human rights challenges. Downing Street insists returns remain imminent, and the injunction affects only individual cases, not the scheme's foundation.
The episode underscores broader tensions in Starmer's migration strategy, as public frustration grows and crossings persist unabated. Charities, including Medical Justice, warn of more legal defeats, estimating most detainees are trafficking or torture survivors.
Detainees at centers such as Brook House have expressed despair. One Eritrean told The Guardian: 'We can't eat. We can't sleep. It's a disaster.' Since early August, the UK Home Office has detained nearly 100 Channel arrivals under the pilot scheme, aiming for weekly returns of about 50 people initially.
Reform UK's leader Nigel Farage calls the deal futile, noting even successful swaps yield a net migration increase. Opposition to the deal is not limited to the Conservatives, with Labour MPs expressing concerns about the potential impact on vulnerable individuals.
The man's vulnerability was acknowledged, but the judge rejected arguments of immediate destitution risk due to France's obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The French media described the High Court decision as a major blow for Starmer.
Work and Pensions Secretary Liz Kendall stated the policy 'will go ahead' despite the ruling. The lawyer representing the plaintiffs in the High Court case to prevent the deportations of refugees is not named in the available search results.
As the legal battle continues, the future of the 'supreme court' deal remains uncertain, potentially leaving Labour's pledge to 'smash the gangs' in legal limbo for months.
Read also:
- United States tariffs pose a threat to India, necessitating the recruitment of adept negotiators or strategists, similar to those who had influenced Trump's decisions.
- Weekly happenings in the German Federal Parliament (Bundestag)
- Southwest region's most popular posts, accompanied by an inquiry:
- Discussion between Putin and Trump in Alaska could potentially overshadow Ukraine's concerns
