“The standards by which we treat people in our society should be constant; whoever they are, human rights are human rights…. Where we are removing someone’s liberty, protections have to be significant. On current evidence, that balance has not been struck, and the treatment and safeguards for everyone in detention, particularly those with additional vulnerabilities, are just not sufficient.”

 Quote from speech by Lord German (Liberal Democrat)  

 

---

 

On 14 October 2024, members of the House of Lords, supported by Medical Justice, debated highly concerning changes to the Adults at Risk in Immigration Detention Statutory Guidance (AAR SG) that water down the protections provided to vulnerable detained people. 

 The changes, brought in by the last Conservative government, came into effect in May 2024. They include removing a previous statutory commitment to reducing the number of vulnerable people in detention, and granting the government the power to seek a second opinion – from a Home Office contracted doctor – on independent external medical evidence documenting a detained person’s vulnerability, delaying consideration of the available evidence for several weeks or more (known as the “Second Opinion Policy”). 

Despite having the option to withdraw the changes, the new Labour government has chosen to keep them in place. In light of this, and following previous parliamentary work led by Medical Justice to highlight concerns, Labour peer Baroness Lister of Burtersett tabled a debate in the House of Lords on the issue. 

Fourteen peers attended the debate, including Home Office Minister Lord Hanson of Flint, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and Lord Hunt of Wirral, Chair of the Lords’ Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee (SLSC), The committee issued a critical report on the AAR SG changes earlier this year, following evidence submitted by Medical Justice. 

You can read key extracts from the debate below, including key points from peers and the government’s response.

The full video of the debate is available here, or you can read a written transcript here.

---

Written debate briefing for peers 

Medical Justice, in collaboration with eleven other NGOs, published a briefing for parliamentarians in advance of the debate, which explains AAR SG changes in more detail and highlights key concerns. 

You can download the debate written briefing here. 

The briefing is jointly badged with Bail for Immigration Detainees (BID), Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS) UK, Refugee Council, Women for Refugee Women, the Helen Bamber Foundation, Detention Action, Association of Visitors to Immigration Detention (AVID), Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association (ILPA), Freedom from Torture, Gatwick Detainees Welfare Group (GDWG), and Rainbow Migration.  

---

What did peers say?  

Peers raised a variety of serious concerns during the debate, both in relation to the AAR SG changes and wider issues in detention. You can read extracts below.  

 

“In effect, the regulations reduce the protection provided by statutory guidance to adults at risk in detention, which could increase the risk of the kinds of human rights violations uncovered in the Brook House inquiry.”

 Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Labour) 

 

“I have always thought that anyone seeking asylum or who is detained, is likely to be vulnerable…The whole of this population is vulnerable, but not all of them are protected under the legislation and the guidance…”

 Baroness Hamwee (Liberal Democrat)  

 

“I am deeply concerned that these regulations expressly remove the intention to reduce the numbers of people in detention who are vulnerable in specifically acute ways. As the Minister will know, the previous Government appear to have accepted just one of the Brook House inquiry’s 33 recommendations. I would welcome confirmation from the Minister that [the government] will revisit that inquiry report to ensure that all the recommendations are given due consideration for implementation.”

The Lord Bishop of Sheffield 

  

“There should be—indeed, there must be—a clear presumption that people at risk because of existing or potential mental health problems should not be detained. ‘Detained’ is a euphemism; they are, in effect, imprisoned. We imprison people as a punishment, so the need to avoid providing these people with punishment is clear.”

 Lord Davies of Brixton (Labour) 

 

“Fifty children were detained on the year to June 2024, 29 of them in Yarl’s Wood short-term holding facility and 10 in Gatwick pre-departure accommodation. A recent report from the independent monitoring board that looked into detention conditions in family pre-departure accommodation at Gatwick called for this detention centre to be closed… Detaining families for removal must be re-examined, with the utmost concern given to the welfare of children at all times.”

 Baroness Mobarik (Conservative) 

 

“In Manchester, we have Pennine House, an immigration detention centre close to Manchester Airport. A few years ago, there was an absolutely damning inspection report into that facility. When the then Government made their response, it was ‘We’re going to ignore all the recommendations in this report’. What is the point of having a debate about regulations about how we are going to care for people in these places if, when it is not being done properly and when independent inspectors go in and say, “This is wrong. This is not what is supposed to be happening”, the Government just turn around and ignore them?” 

 The Lord Bishop of Manchester 

---

Other points raised by peers 

 In relation to the AAR SG changes:  

• The changes are contrary to the recommendations of the recent Brook House Inquiry 

• The Home Office has failed to provide compelling evidence to support the introduction of the Second Opinion Policy, as highlighted by the Lords’ SLSC 

• The Home Office’s external consultation on the changes was inadequate 

• The government must urgently provide more details, including terms of reference and a timeframe, about its planned review of detention, which it has stated will include the AAR SG changes 

 

More generally on detention:  

• There are ongoing safeguarding failures in detention  

• There are particular risks faced in detention by pregnant women, as well as LGBTQI+ people, and people with severe mental health conditions 

• There is an urgent need for the new government to implement all of the recommendations of the recent Brook House Inquiry, including introducing a time limit on detention 

• The government’s decision to continue the re-opening of Campsfield and Haslar IRCs, started under the previous government, is worrying. It will expand the detention estate by up to 1,000 new detention spaces 

---

How has the government responded?

Home Office Minister Lord Hanson of Flint’s response during the debate left many questions unanswered.  

He confirmed that government is carrying out a review of the Adults at Risk policy and Detention Centre Rules 34 and 35 which will look at “improving the effectiveness of the regulations and safeguards”. The review will include consultation with NGOs and is anticipated to conclude by spring 2025.  

You can read Lord Hanson’s speech in full here. 

 

 

In collaboration with ten other NGOs, Medical Justice has produced a joint briefing for parliamentarians about alarming recent changes made by the government to the Adults at Risk in Immigration Detention Statutory Guidance (AARSG) that further reduce the already inadequate protections for vulnerable people in detention. 

You can download and read a copy of the briefing here

The revised AARSG was published in draft form in April, and came into effect on 21 May 2024. You can read more about the changes here and here (paywall). 

Our joint briefing explains the changes in detail and highlights key concerns, including that: 

• the revised AARSG is likely to result in more vulnerable individuals being detained, for longer periods or time, with an increased risk of suffering harm including human rights violations (e.g. breaches of Article 3 ECHR). 

• the changes run entirely counter to the recommendations of the recent Brook House Inquiry. The Inquiry found that safeguards for vulnerable people in detention should be strengthened, not reduced. 

• there were deficiencies in the Home Office’s ‘consultation’ with NGOs on the changes, including lack of necessary information being provided and too short a time-frame. 

• the House of Lords’ Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee has issued a critical report on the changes, following evidence submitted by Medical Justice. 

The briefing is jointly badged with Bail for Immigration Detainees (BID), Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS) UK, Refugee Council, Women for Refugee Women, the Helen Bamber Foundation, Detention Action, Association of Visitors to Immigration Detention (AVID), Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association (ILPA), Freedom from Torture, and Gatwick Detainees Welfare Group (GDWG).  

Medical Justice plans to continue work to oppose the changes once Parliament returns following the general election.

 

In February 2024, the House of Lords established a temporary committee to investigate the efficacy of the law and practice relating to statutory inquiries.

Medical Justice has submitted written evidence to the Committee, raising concerns about the opaque and unclear nature of the government’s response to the Brook House Inquiry, published on 19 March 2024.

You can download our evidence to the Committee here:

House of Lords’ Statutory Inquiries Committee – Evidence submitted by Medical Justice

The fact that the government has been able to respond in such a way to a statutory inquiry suggests that the current legal and policy framework around implementation of inquiry recommendations is wholly inadequate. Whilst this is not an area of expertise for Medical Justice, our submission urges the Committee to look in more detail the issue, and to find ways to strengthen powers in this area.

Medical Justice is deeply concerned by the passing of the Illegal Migration Act 2023 and opposes the legislation in its entirety. The Act effectively amounts to a ban on claiming asylum in the UK by most asylum seekers. Amongst many other worrying provisions, the Act greatly increases the Home Secretary’s powers of detention, expands who can be detained, including in relation to children, and curtails judicial scrutiny and effective avenues for challenging a person’s detention. 

During the Act’s passage through Parliament, Medical Justice supported MPs and Peers with their efforts to oppose the legislation and highlight its damaging effects. Our activities included organising in-person meetings, providing written briefings, working with Peers to table amendments, writing to Ministers, and media work. We worked collaboratively with other organisations who share our concerns. 

You can access all written materials on the Act produced by Medical Justice, either individually or jointly with other organisations, below. 

  

Commons Committee stage (27-28 March 2023) 

 

Joint briefing on detention of pregnant women (23 March 2023) – Medical Justice, Birth Companions, British Medical Association, Maternity Action, Royal College of Midwives, Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, and Women for Refugee Women 

 

Briefing on detention provisions of the Illegal Migration Bill (24 March 2023) – Medical Justice

Lords’ stages – general 

Sector-wide strategy meeting for Lords’ stages (18 April 2023) – organised by Medical Justice and Garden Court Chambers. Four peers attended, along with their special advisors and over 40 representatives from 27 NGOs. Lessons were shared from previous Bills and a proposed strategy was agreed in relation to amendments, further meetings and wider coordination. 

 

Lords Second Reading (10 May 2023)

 

Joint briefing on medical consequences of the Illegal Migration Bill (20 April 2023) – Medical Justice, Doctors of the World, Freedom from Torture, Helen Bamber Foundation, Maternity Action and Médecins Sans Frontières 

 

Online briefing meeting for peers on Illegal Migration Bill – Notes (3 May 2023) – the meeting was organised by Medical Justice and chaired by Baroness Chakrabarti (Labour). Fifteen cross-party peers attended, along with their special advisors and over 45 representatives from 35 NGOs. The discussion covered all aspects of the Bill: experts by experience provided their views on the legislation, and additional presentations were provided by Medical Justice, JUSTICE, Refugee Council, ECPAT UK, Refugee and Migrant Children’s Consortium, Focus on Labour Exploitation (FLEX), Immigration Law Practitioners Association, Garden Court Chambers, Refugee Action, and Women for Refugee Women. Notes from the meeting (link above) were shared with peers to assist in their preparation for the Bill. 

  

Joint briefing on Illegal Migration Bill (5 May 2023)– Medical Justice, Anti-Slavery International, Anti-Trafficking and Labour Exploitation Unit (ATLEU), Bail for Immigration Detainees, Committee on the Administration of Justice (CAJ), Detention Action, Focus on Labour Exploitation (FLEX), Helen Bamber Foundation, Human Rights Watch, Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association (ILPA), JustRight Scotland, Liberty, Northern Ireland Human Rights Consortium, No Accommodation Network (NACCOM), the PILS Project, Praxis, Public Law Project, Rainbow Migration, Refugee Action, Refugee Council, Scottish Refugee Council, Welsh Civil Society Forum, and Women for Refugee Women

 

Open letter to the Home Secretary on medical consequences of the Illegal Migration Bill (10 May 2023) – Medical Justice, British Medical Association, Doctors of the World UK, Faculty of Public Health, Freedom From Torture, Helen Bamber Foundation, International Child Health Group, Maternity Action, Médecins Sans Frontières UK, Medical Justice, Royal College of Nursing, Unison, Unite 

 

Joint civil society solidarity statement on the Illegal Migration Bill (10 May 2023) – Medical Justice and 180 other organisations

 

Joint briefing on child detention (10 May 2023) – Refugee and Migrant Children’s Consortium (RMCC), including Medical Justice 

 

Joint letter to the Times on detention of pregnant women (11 May 2023) – Medical Justice, Birth Companions, British Medical Association, Maternity Action, Royal College of Midwives, Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Women for Refugee Women 

 

Joint briefing on detention provisions in the Illegal Migration Bill (19 May 2023) – Medical Justice, Bail for Immigration Detainees (BID), Detention Action, and Women for Refugee Women 

 

Lords Committee Stage (24 May, 5, 7, 12, and 14 June 2023) 

 

Written briefings for each of the amendments below, tabled by peers at Medical Justice’s suggestion:  

• Amendment 62 – limiting detention only to those facilities already authorised for detention (IRCs, STHFs, PDAs, prisons etc) and creating a duty to consult local residents before opening new facilities – tabled by Lord German (Liberal Democrat) and the Lord Bishop of Durham 

• Amendment 68 – creating a statutory ban on the use of force against children and pregnant women to effect detention and removal – tabled by Baroness Lister of Burtersett (Labour), Baroness Gohir (crossbencher), the Lord Bishop of Gloucester, and Baroness Chakrabarti (Labour) 
• Amendment 78 – creating an exemption from the detention ouster clause for people with medical report evidencing their vulnerability – tabled by the Lord Bishop of Durham, Baroness Lister, and Baroness Neuberger (crossbencher) 
• Amendment 139B – placing the Home Secretary under a duty to implement HMIP recommendations made in relation to immigration detention, and to do so within 6 months – tabled by the Lord Bishop of Durham, Lord Scriven (Liberal Democrat) and Baroness Lister  
  
• Amendment 142 – preventing the implementation of any substantive parts of the Bill until the Chair of the Brook House Inquiry has published her report and the government has explained how it will put into practice her recommendations – tabled by Lord German

 

Joint briefing on the Illegal Migration Bill and its impact on children (25 May 2023) – Medical Justice, British Association of Social Workers, British Medical Association, Refugee Council, Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health 

 

Joint briefing on child detention (30 May 2023) – Refugee and Migrant Children’s Consortium, including Medical Justice 

 

Lords Report Stage (28 June, 3, and 5 July 2023) 

Joint briefing on child detention (27 June 2023) – Medical Justice, Article 39, Bail for Immigration Detainees (BID), Barnardo’s, Children England, Citizens UK, Children’s Rights Alliance for England, the Children’s Society, Coram, Detention Action, ECPAT UK, Helen Bamber Foundation, National Children’s Bureau, National Youth Advocacy Service, Plan International, Refugee Council, Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, Safe Passage, Save The Children, Together With Refugees 

Joint briefing on Clause 1 / Amendment 5 to the Illegal Migration Bill (28 June 2023) – Medical Justice and over 50 other organisations 

Joint briefing on immigration bail, judicial review and habeas corpus (28 June 2023) – Medical Justice, Bail for Immigration Detainees (BID), Detention Action, ILPA, Liberty, Committee on the Administration of Justice (CAJ), Public Law Project 

 

For Commons consideration of Lords amendments (11 July 2023) 

Joint briefing on immigration bail, judicial review and habeas corpus (10 July 2023) – Medical Justice, BID, Detention Action, ILPA 

 

Joint briefing on Clause 1 of the Illegal Migration Bill (10 July) – Medical Justice and over 65 other organisations 

 

Open letter to the Prime Minister on the detention of children (11 July 2023) – Medical Justice and over 150 other organisations 

 

Anti-trafficking sector joint briefing on Clause 1 of the Illegal Migration Bill and compliance with international obligations (11 July 2023) – Medical Justice and over 30 other organisations 

 

Royal Assent 

Joint civil society statement on the passage of the Illegal Migration Act – Medical Justice and over 285 other organisations (18 July 2023) 

Evidence from the Taskforce on Victims of Human Trafficking in Immigration Detention

 

The Detention Taskforce on Victims of Human Trafficking in Immigration Detention, of which Medical Justice is a part of, responded to the Home Affairs Committee Inquiry into Human Trafficking, in March 2023. Our response focused on issues surrounding the detention of survivors of ttrafficking and the impact of this. It drew on the findings and recommendations made in the our joint report ‘Abuse by the System: survivors of trafficking in immigration detention’.

 

In December 2022, the government laid secondary legislation creating a new category of Short-term Holding Facility (STHF), designed specifically for the notorious site at Manston. The new category is known as a “Residential Holding Room” (RHR).

In early January 2023, along a number of other charities Medical Justice submitted evidence to a Committee in the Lords tasked with scrutinising the legislation in early January 2023. We highlighted grave concerns about the legislation, including how it allows safeguards and standards at sites designated as RHRs like Manston to be dramatically downgraded, whilst also quadrupling the length of time – from 24 to 96 hours – that the Home Office can hold people there.

The Committee issued a report on the legislation in late January which is very critical of the government. It picks many of the points we raised, before concluding that the Committee is “left with the strong impression that the new category [of STHF] is designed for the operational convenience of the Home Office, rather than for good reasons of public policy”.

Read our submission here. The Committee’s full report is available here (from p.19).