A huge backlog of immigration cases is building up in the UK amid claims that the Home Office and Ministry of Justice are in dispute over who pays for tribunals.
According to lawyers representing appellants, the number of hearings at immigration and asylum tribunal centres around the country has almost halved since the election as a money-saving measure. Emergency sittings of immigration tribunals are being organised to tackle the buildup of cases as hearings are being listed 18 months ahead.
Other lawyers have described the situation as chaotic, with tribunal hearing rooms left unused and tribunal ushers warned that they could be made redundant. The cutback is alleged to have been due to differences between the Home Office and Ministry of Justice over who should pay. The courts service, a subsidiary of the MoJ, had budgeted for a reduction in the number of sittings.
News of the fresh delays emerged as the Parliamentary and Health Services Ombudsman produced a scathing report on the poor handling by the Home Office of immigration claims.
The report said the ombudsman was upholding seven in every 10 complaints it received, with long delays and poor decision-making being the main problems. One teenager had waited nearly a decade for a Home Office decision, which had cost him employment and education opportunities.
The backlog of unresolved immigration and asylum cases is notoriously large; in 2013 the Commons’ home affairs select committee estimated that it had reached 500,000. Those fighting deportation cases believe it has grown since then.
HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has said it will organise extra hearings to cope with the problem but denies that there is a dispute between the two departments over funding.
Colin Yeo, a barrister at Garden Court chambers who specialises in immigration cases, said: “They have cut the number of courts so that those at Hatton Cross and Taylor House [in London] are down to about half of their former level. Some cases are taking 18 months to get listed.”
Some of those forced to wait are already in immigration detention, which imposes extra costs on other parts of government. There is a suspicion that waiting times are being lengthened to discourage applicants from abroad.
“These delays have an appalling impact on the mental health of those people held in detention centres,” Yeo said. “People are having to wait longer and longer in detention.”
The delays are causing particular hardship to separated families where the Home Office has made an incorrect decision: the appeal success rate in such cases is 40%. Mistakes in rulings are common.
To cope with the delays, the first tier tribunal immigration and asylum chamber has circulated a note detailing priorities for listing cases. They should be dealth with in the following order: detained appellants, deprivation of citizenship cases, appeals involving children, asylum appeals and other appeals.
Last week the Labour MP Meg Hillier complained at justice questions in the Commons about the “unreasonable waits” for constituents, including one case already listed for next May.
The justice minister, Shailesh Vara, told her: “As a consequence of the Immigration Act 2014, we anticipate the number of appeals going down. We are keeping an eye on the numbers and at the moment we do not see a particular concern, but if there is one, we will make sure that there are more sittings.”
Three days later an HM Courts & Tribunals Service spokesperson said: “Immigration and asylum appeals are currently being heard within eight months on average. Significant delays only arise when cases are very complicated. To maintain current performance levels we are putting in additional sitting days for judges from next month.
“It is nonsense to suggest we are in dispute with the Home Office and we continue to work closely with them on reforms to the immigration system.”
Both the Home Office and the MoJ referred questions to HMCTS and declined to respond directly.
