Lone child migrants cannot be housed in hotels, rules High Court

Lone child migrants cannot be housed in hotels, rules High Court, as judge raps Suella Braverman for ‘exceeding her power’ with unlawful ‘routine’

• The High Court ruling said children should only be in hotels  in ’emergencies’

The Home Office’s ‘routine’ housing of unaccompanied child asylum seekers in hotels is unlawful, the High Court has ruled.

The ruling, which was overseen by Mr Justice Chamberlain, also stated that Home Secretary Suella Braverman’s ‘provision of hotel accommodation for unaccompanied asylum-seeking children exceeded the proper limits of her powers.’

The charity Every Child Protected Against Trafficking (ECPAT) brought legal action against the Home Office over the practice of housing unaccompanied youngsters in Home Office hotels, claiming the arrangements are ‘not fit for purpose’.

In his ruling today, Mr Justice Chamberlain said the use of hotels for unaccompanied asylum-seeking children has become unlawful, as the power to place the children in hotels ‘may be used on very short periods in true emergency situations’.

He told the court in London: ‘It cannot be used systematically or routinely in circumstances where it is intended, or functions in practice, as a substitute for local authority care.’

A group of people thought to be migrants are brought in to Dover, Kent, from a Border Force vessel after being rescued during a small boat incident in the Channel

Home Secretary Suella Braverman has been criticised for ‘exceeding her power’ 

The judge continued: ‘From December 2021 at the latest, the practice of accommodating children in hotels, outside local authority care, was both systematic and routine and had become an established part of the procedure for dealing with unaccompanied asylum-seeking children.

‘From that point on, the Home Secretary’s provision of hotel accommodation for unaccompanied asylum-seeking children exceeded the proper limits of her powers and was unlawful.

‘There is a range of options open to the Home Secretary to ensure that unaccompanied asylum-seeking children are accommodated and looked after as envisaged by Parliament.

‘It is for her to decide how to do so.’

READ MORE: More than 14,000 migrants have arrived in UK this year after crossing Channel on small boats, Home Office figures show

ECPAT’s bid was heard in London alongside similar claims brought by Brighton and Hove City Council and Kent County Council against the department.

The Home Office and Department for Education had opposed the legal challenges and said that the hotel use was lawful but was ‘deployed effectively as a ‘safety net’ and as a matter of necessity’.

Following Mr Justice Chamberlain’s ruling, Patricia Durr, chief executive of Every Child Protected Against Trafficking, said: ‘This judgment powerfully reaffirms the primacy of the Children Act 1989 and our child welfare statutory framework which does not allow for children to treated differently because of their immigration status.

‘It remains a child protection scandal that so many of the most vulnerable children remain missing at risk of significant harm as a consequence of these unlawful actions by the Secretary of State and Kent County Council.

‘Despite the recent passing of the Illegal Migration Act 2023, which will deny unaccompanied children the right to claim asylum, amongst other hugely damaging provisions, this judgment serves as a clear and timely reminder that neither central nor local government departments can depart from the statutory child welfare framework and the duties towards all children under The Children Act 1989.

‘We will continue to defend the rights of every child in the UK to live free from exploitation and access the care they are entitled to under the law.’

Mr Justice Chamberlain said that the use of hotels cannot be seen as an ’emergency’ measure given the length of their use.

He said: ‘The Home Secretary has been accommodating children in hotels for over two years.

‘It may be that, in June and July 2021, the Home Secretary could plausibly have contended that the commissioning of hotels was intended and functioning an emergency measure.

‘It is much more difficult to make that case after September 2021, when she agreed the Kent Protocol, which formalised the cap on the numbers of unaccompanied asylum seeking children that Kent County Council would accept, against a common understanding that any unaccompanied asylum seeking children children who arrived when the cap had been reached would be accommodated by the Home Secretary in hotels.

‘She and Kent County Council may well have hoped that it would not be necessary to use hotels, but it rapidly became clear that this intention was not being realised.’

Source: Read Full Article