A 25-year-old Eritrean man has been able to stay in the UK for a short time because of the “one in, one out” policy between the UK and France. The High Court in London issued an order because there were worries that he would be a victim of human trafficking. Under the experimental program that was agreed upon in July, he was supposed to be deported. But the judge said that the claim needs more legal review.
The UK will send back migrants who cross the Channel in small boats, but it will admit refugees who have family ties in the UK. The Eritrean man’s lawyers said the evacuation was done too quickly. They told him he needed more time to show proof of trafficking.
What Are the Reasons for a Legal Challenge?
The man’s lawyers said that the people in charge responded too quickly. They say that the decision to remove them didn’t take into account possible trafficking claims. They also cautioned about the dangers of being homeless and poor in France. The National Referral Mechanism asked for more representations.
Justice Clive Sheldon said that the policy has a “serious issue to be tried.” He said that arguments about trafficking need to be properly tested. The Home Office, on the other hand, said that it is realistic to expect some applicants to seek refuge in France first. Here is the link to our article on the Supreme Court Decision.
What Does the Policy Do?
The one in one out policy is meant to stop people from crossing the English Channel in small boats. The pact says that for every person sent back to France, the UK will take in a recognised refugee who has ties to Britain. The agreement was signed to control the flow of people moving. It started working not too long ago.
Critics, on the other hand, say that the plan could violate the rights of those who are trafficked or who can’t safely make representations from outside the country. This case could set a precedent for other people to put off or stop removals.
What Was the Court’s Decision?
The court stopped the man from being removed for the time being. He has 14 days to send in more proof that he was trafficked. The judge turned down allegations that deportation would automatically lead to poverty. But he did agree that it is the law’s duty to look into the trafficking claim adequately.
The court also said that the policy’s execution must follow the law. The policy cannot allow removal to happen without a clear evaluation of each instance. Here is the link to our article on Court Judge Trials.
What Are the Political Reactions?
The ruling is the first time the one-out policy has lost in court. It puts the government and the Home Office under a lot of stress. Politicians in the opposition say the plan is not good. Some people feel it hurts the protection of human rights.
Supporters say the strategy is necessary to cut down on unauthorised crossings. In the meantime, officials from the administration say they expect deportation to start soon. They say that the pilots follow the law.
Final Thoughts
The one-in-one-out policy is about to undergo its first major legal test. It needs to strike a balance between controlling migration flows and safeguarding individual rights. The case highlights significant issues in the handling of trafficking claims. As more challenges arise, the future of the policy will depend on whether it remains fair, legally sound, and respectful of human dignity.
