Those Who Illegally Crossed The Channel In Small Boats Will Not Be Able To Appeal Their Deportation

Ministers are drawing up plans to stop Channel migrants from lodging legal challenges against deportation.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has already outlined how the Government plans to automatically bar migrants from claiming asylum as part of his promise to stop the boats, but additional steps are being formulated to strip back migrants’ ability to launch judicial reviews or appeals.

Two different sets of proposals are being drawn up, a newspaper outlet said, which are likely to pit ministers in a major conflict with the courts.

The first, and the most extreme option would stop all small boat migrants from submitting a judicial review of their exclusion from the asylum system.

The second proposal would only permit legal challenges to be lodged once the migrant has been removed from the United Kingdom, a process known as out-of-country appeals.

Proposals are still being finalised by Home Secretary Suella Braverman and the Prime Minister, but are likely to be included in a landmark package of measures, maybe later this month.

A government source said that the Prime Minister and Home Secretary were working flat out to bring forward the ruling as soon as possible and ensure that it’s legally watertight.

So-called ‘out of country’ appeals, also known as ‘non-suspensive’ appeals, have been widely used in the asylum system for more than 25 years.

In 1996 legislation set out how asylum applicants from ‘safe third countries’ could only appeal from abroad against the Home Office’s decision to veto their case.

A wide expansion of the same principle is likely to be opposed by the House of Lords, judges and the human rights industry because it would cover all nationalities who come by small boat, even if their home country isn’t deemed safe.

The Government’s Rwanda asylum scheme, if finally ruled lawful by senior judges later this year, could play a part in the jigsaw of new measures.

For example, Channel arrivals who come from dangerous lands could be sent to Rwanda, and lodge appeals from there.

Yesterday, a newspaper outlet reported how Rishi Sunak said the new ruling would ensure those who came here illegally ‘will not be able to stay’ and the ‘vast majority’ who crossed the Channel would be deported.

Previously he pledged the Government would stop the boats as one of its five key promises to voters after last year saw a record 45,756 arrivals from northern France.

Way to go, but why didn’t they enforce this policy ages ago? Now, it’s too little, too late. Because previously we had a wimpy government of prime ministers who were terrified of offending and now it’s spiralled out of control.

Our government and previous prime ministers had years to do this and enforce other measures to deter visitors, and they didn’t do a single thing, so why should we continue to believe them now?

It’s always been all talk and no action, and this seems to be more rhetoric, and we’ve heard it too many times before to try and pacify us.

We might believe it when it happens because Rishi Sunak like all those before him will come up against the usual gathering of do-gooders, woke and political left-wing extremists and human rights lawyers, all thwarting any attempts to stop illegal landings.

This government are as weak as Swiss Cheese, and it’s a shame they’re not any stronger, and it’s highly unlikely any of their promises will happen because it’s always a plan and not what’s being done because it’s all hot air.