Illegal Migration Bill: amendments explained - human rights judges to lose powers to block deportation flights

The government will soon be able to ignore orders from human rights judges who attempt to block migrant deportation flights from the UK.

Amendments to the Illegal Migration Bill will give ministers the legal authority to disregard ‘Rule 39’ injunction orders from the European Court of Human Rights, which can prevent migrants from being deported where there is “a real risk of serious and irreversible harm”. This is what happened to the first flight of asylum seekers meant to head forRwanda.

Instead, the Home Office has amended the upcoming legislation so that migrants who arrive in the UK illegally can only avoid being removed if they prove they face “serious or irreversible harm” in the country to which they are being deported.

The wording here is essentially the same, which has sparked some confusion. But it is understood that the main change will be that deciding whether migrants face harm will be up to the government, rather than the ECHR.

The changes have come after Prime Minister Rishi Sunak made concessions to a group of right-wing Tory MPs, who had been demanding tougher action against the ECHR. Many have expressed anger at the court’s interventions in attempted deportation flights, branding the ‘Rule 39’ orders “pyjama injunctions”.

In exchange for the concessions, according to The Times, the rebel group has agreed not to table other amendments that aimed to harden the bill - and which threatened to divide the party.

It is expected that the government will publish the new version of the Illegal Migration Bill either today (20 April) or tomorrow (21 April), before it returns to the House of Commons next week for the next stage of debates and votes.

The proposed legislation, which was set out by Home Secretary Suella Braverman last month, would prevent anyone deemed to have entered the UK illegally from claiming asylum. Instead, they would be immediately detained without bail or judicial review, and subsequently removed from the country, for example via deportation to Rwanda.

This supposedly forms a central part of Sunak’s pledge to “stop the boats” crossing the English Channel, with the Prime Minister describing the move as “fair for those at home” and “for those who have a legitimate claim to asylum.”

While some Tory MPs believe the bill does not go far enough to reduce illegal migration, refugee charities and human rights experts have expressed outrage at the proposals - arguing they breach the Human Rights Act. EU Commissioner Ylva Johansson said she personally told Braverman, prior to the bill’s announcement, that she believes her asylum plan “violates” international law.

Commenting on the reported new amendments, a government spokesperson said: “The Prime Minister is focused on delivering on his five priorities for 2023 – halving inflation, growing the economy, reducing debt, cutting waiting lists and stopping the boats.

“While we have been clear there is no silver bullet, our Stop the Boats Bill will ensure anyone arriving illegally will be detained and swiftly removed, ending the unfair practice of people skipping the queue.”