London: Non-British rapists, killers and burglars were on Thursday stripped of their right to lodge a “conveyer belt” of appeals in a bid to cheat deportation.
Under tough new laws, the number of grounds on which non-British criminals can contest their removal will be reduced from a staggering 17 to just four.
Crucially, they will no longer be able to appeal simply because they do not agree with the Home Office’s decision or they think their crime was “not serious enough”.
Lawyers acting for the convicts will also have only one opportunity to present any relevant papers or arguments.
This will bring an end to the common delaying tactic of solicitors turning up at immigration hearings with “new evidence” and demanding an adjournment.
Ministers hope the bonfire of appeal rights will save the taxpayer tens of millions of pounds and help to end the scandal of foreign offenders clogging up Britain’s jails and immigration centres.
The blitz is backed by a new power of “deport first and appeal later” for criminals who have no realistic prospect of success.
Last night, immigration minister James Brokenshire said the old system was “perverse” and “stacked in favour of foreign criminals rather than ordinary, law-abiding people”. He told the Mail: “Britain is known throughout the world for the respect we give to the rule of law.
“But the foreign criminal appeals conveyor belt is an affront to British justice. We must not allow our natural sense of fair play to be abused by those who do not share our respect for the rule of law.”
An order will be laid in Parliament today spelling out how the new rules will work.
The current 17 possible grounds for appeal will be slashed to four. For example, if a migrant loses an appeal under the present system, he can immediately go back to court to challenge the decision not to revoke his deportation order.
This is despite the fact that, if an appeal is lost, it is inevitable the deportation order will remain in place. Effectively, they are challenging the same decision twice.
The four remaining grounds of appeal are if a migrant is claiming asylum; their human rights are genuinely threatened; an existing decision to grant asylum is being revoked or if they are married to an EU citizen. These are only factors to be considered — not a bar to removal.
Among the many foreign criminals who have flouted the system is violent father-of-two Alvin Brissett, 55, who escaped deportation moments before being put on a plane to Jamaica by suddenly declaring he was homosexual. Brissett claimed he could not be sent to Jamaica because he could face discrimination there, and he has now won the right to remain.
