By Molly Grace
Copyright euroweeklynews
A UK High Court judge has temporarily blocked the deportation of a 25-year-old Eritrean man to France under the government’s “one-in, one-out” migration deal. The man, who arrived in the UK via a small boat on August 12, was scheduled for removal on September 17. His legal team argued that he may be a victim of trafficking and would face destitution if returned to France. The court granted an interim injunction, allowing 14 days for further examination of his claims.
This represents the first successful legal challenge against the UK-France returns agreement, which was announced this July. The deal is designed so that for every migrant the UK returns to France, it will accept one from France who has family ties in the UK. The scheme aims to address the ongoing issue of small boat crossings in the English Channel.
The Home Office had maintained that the man could claim asylum in France. However, the judge concluded that there was a serious issue to be tried regarding his trafficking claim and the potential risks he could face if returned. The ruling has highlighted concerns about the adequacy of support for asylum seekers in France, including issues such as homelessness, limited resources, and potential vulnerability for those with complex protection needs. The UK government has stated that it remains committed to the “one-in, one-out” scheme and intends to proceed with deportations as soon as possible. Nevertheless, this legal challenge underscores the complexities and potential obstacles in implementing the agreement, particularly when claims of trafficking or heightened vulnerability are involved.
As the legal proceedings continue, the case is likely to have significant implications for the future of the UK-France returns deal and the wider approach to managing small boat crossings in the English Channel. Analysts suggest that other potential deportations under the scheme may also face delays or legal challenges if similar arguments are successfully made by asylum seekers or their representatives. The “one-in, one-out” arrangement has been central to the UK government’s strategy to deter irregular migration via the Channel, with the stated aim of breaking the business model of people smugglers. Critics, however, have argued that the policy risks undermining the rights and protections of vulnerable individuals, including trafficking victims, unaccompanied minors, and others requiring international protection.
Legal experts have noted that while the interim injunction is temporary, it represents a significant check on the government’s authority to carry out deportations under the new bilateral arrangement with France. The case will likely be closely watched by human rights groups, immigration lawyers, and policy makers, as it may set a precedent for how claims of vulnerability are assessed within the framework of the “one-in, one-out” system. For now, the Eritrean man remains in the UK while the court considers the next stage of proceedings. His case illustrates both the potential humanitarian issues involved in the migration deal and the challenges of balancing government policy objectives with the legal protections afforded to individuals seeking asylum.
