A high court judge has halted the removal of an Eritrean trafficking victim to France under the UK’s “one in, one out” scheme, after raising concerns that forcibly sending him back could cause him harm.
The controversial deal, under which one asylum seeker who arrives in the UK on a small boat is forcibly returned to France in exchange for another being brought over legally, was launched last summer. As of 5 March, 370 people have been brought to the UK legally and 354 sent back to France. The aim is to deter small boat crossings, but thousands of asylum seekers have crossed the Channel since the scheme started. So far this month, 1,200 people have made the perilous journey.
The Eritrean asylum seeker, 31, who brought the legal challenge, along with two others whose ages are disputed and whose cases will be determined at a later date, is arguing that France does not provide adequate support for trafficking victims. He has been confirmed as a victim of trafficking by the UK authorities, after being detained and exploited by militia in Libya.
He arrived in the UK on 12 August and is being held in detention. He has identified mental health treatment needs and a diagnosis of PTSD.
In his judgment on Wednesday, Mr Justice Sheldon halted the man’s removal pending a final hearing of the case, after making findings that there may be difficulties for “one in, one out” returners accessing accommodation in France and that they were likely to face barriers accessing their entitlement to healthcare in the French system.
Before travelling to the UK in a small boat, the man had tried to claim asylum in France but was not provided with support. The judge found there was a “serious risk that the same will apply if he was to be returned to France”.
He added that the man would “not be recognised by the French authorities as a victim of trafficking … as the trafficking did not take place in France”. He said there was a “real doubt” that the man would be able to access timely mental health support in France and concluded he was “likely to suffer harm to his mental health if he is removed forcibly to France”.
Elizabeth Cole, of Duncan Lewis solicitors, who is representing the man said: “We are encouraged that the court has recognised shortcomings in the French system in terms of identifying and supporting victims of trafficking. This includes failing to identify victims of trafficking who were trafficked outside of France by non-French nationals, and ensuring that appropriate support, including accommodation and healthcare, can be accessed by victims in a timely and effective way.
“While definitive findings may not be made until the final hearing in April, this is an important step forward in terms of recognising the gaps in the French system and the significance of these gaps for the claims of those the secretary of state intends to remove – or indeed has already removed – under the scheme.”
The Home Office said:“Modern slavery laws should protect those who have faced unimaginable suffering and not be used as a tactic for undermining our borders. Safeguarding and vulnerability factors are assessed before any removal decision is made, and people are treated with dignity and respect throughout the process.”
France’s interior ministry has been approached for comment.
