Arguments Against IA 2014

The emergence of the IA 2014 has overreaching consequences on the United Kingdom (UK) immigration system. Although, the government’s reasons for the IA 2014 is to enable a robust system of immigration control that will cut out abuse of the immigration system and save cost in the long run. However, it becomes complex as most of the government necessary immigration reforms seems to contradict the UK constitutional principles, and some of its obligations under the Convention . The conflict between the Secretary of State legitimate right to control immigration, and the Judiciary independence in maintaining the rule of law becomes live, as we see in various courts decisions. Therefore, it influences the constant changing in UK immigration rules

All valid immigration applications from persons lawfully in the UK attract rights of appeal against the Home Office decisions to an independent immigration tribunal who would consider the decision afresh as long as the application were submitted before the expiration of their leave. Deportation order cannot be signed while an appeal is pending, which means deportation appeals were ‘suspensive’, however, it is no more the case under the IA 2014 system. Article 8 of the ECHR immigration applications were also highly considered prior to IA 2014. Applicant may have the right of appeal up to the Supreme Court and an automatic visa extension was available for the migrants during the appeal process. Appeal rights were been decided upon, according to the provision of Section 82 of the NIAA 2002. Likewise, breach of European Union (EU) rights were grounds of appeal to the tribunal against immigration decisions. Meanwhile, EU rights no longer appear as grounds for appeal in the NIAA

The IA 2014 added to the existing power of certification introduced by the last Labour government in 2002, it has introduced ‘deport first, appeal later’ into the NIAA 2002. It is provided by section 92 NIAA 2002 that a protection claim appeal under section 82(1)(a) must be brought from outside the UK if the related appeal has been certified by the SSHD under s94(1) or (7) of the NIAA 2002. It also provides that a person is not entitled to appeal from inside the UK if their asylum and human rights claim is certified as clearly unfounded by the