ABSTRACT
On 27 October 2003, the government announced its intention to pass legislation for a balanced approach in asylum and immigration policy. This was only one year after the Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002, breaking the trend of fresh legislation every three years in this area since 1993, although the restriction on rights of appeal began as long ago as the Immigration Act 1988. The government’s approach on asylum was to be seen now in the wider context of managed migration, through which the government would open up routes for people to enter the UK legally, whilst clamping down on those who enter illegally and make unfounded claims. In passing this Act, the government declared its intention to set out to tackle two particular problems. The first was to deal with those applicants who lodged groundless appeals to delay removal. The second was to deal with those asylum seekers who deliberately destroy or dispose of their documents in order to be able to make unfounded claims. To attain these ends, the government said it would increase the speed and finality of the appeal system. An efficient and speedy system would provide effective remedy, but discourage dishonesty. As a result, no longer would there be a twotier system of administrative appeals; instead, this Act would create a single tier of appeals. A single tier would simplify the appeal system and reduce the risk of people seeking to play the system by making unfounded appeals to the State for final resolution of their cases. It would replace the current structure with a single appeal to a new single-tier tribunal, the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal (AIT), headed by a President. The new judiciary would be titled immigration judges or senior immigration judges and the vast majority of appeals would be heard and decided by a single immigration judge. He would work closely with more senior District Immigration Judges. The judicial oversight provided by the designated senior immigration judge would ensure high quality justice without allowing cases to drag on for many months for the legal process. The government argued that fairness, finality and speed would be the hallmarks of the new appeal system. It would abolish the two-tier system, but it would still safeguard the right of appeal and provide an effective remedy for those whose applications had been refused by the Immigration and Nationality Directorate (IND) or an entry clearance officer. This single system is, however, open to criticism.
