Government accused of ‘propaganda campaign’ over English Channel crossings

Law firms forced to increase security amid rise in threats and abuse over immigration work, MPs told

The government has been accused of mounting dangerous attacks on lawyers as part of a “propaganda campaign” over English Channel crossings.

The Home Affairs Committee was told that several law firms that work on immigration cases have increased their security following remarks by the prime minister and home secretary.

Some now close their offices when a court judgment is handed down that favours asylum seekers for fear of retribution, MPs heard on Wednesday.

Lawyers working on migration cases have also experienced an increase in “very serious threats” and abuse in recent months.

A man was accused of attempting a far-right terror attack at a London solicitors’ firm in September.

Cavan Medlock has been charged with planning to kill a lawyer from Duncan Lewis Solicitors because of their work representing migrants.

As part of its inquiry into English Channel crossings, the Home Affairs Committee asked lawyers appearing at an evidence session to respond to government remarks on “activist lawyers”.

Michelle Knorr, a barrister from Doughty Street Chambers, said: “The way the term is being used appears to be some sort of propaganda campaign and I would say it’s dangerous and distressing.

“The profession and regulatory bodies have pushed back against the use of that term in the way it has been deployed by the prime minister and the home secretary.”

Ms Knorr said lawyers only “advise on the law as parliament makes it” and pointed out a recent case where the Home Office was found to be violating its own policy on identifying victims of trafficking.

David Blundell QC, a barrister from Landmark Chambers, said the issue of English Channel crossings had become “highly politicised”.

He told MPs that he was aware of immigration cases where “there have been very serious threats to lawyers acting on the claimant side”.

Ms Knorr said she would have “never expected” government ministers to make the comments about lawyers aired in recent months.

“It’s the first time in my 12 years working in the field that I’ve experienced anything like this,” she added.

“Many chambers and law firms I work with have had to increase their security.”

The Home Office sparked a backlash in August, when a video was posted on its official Twitter account referring to immigration lawyers advising migrants who crossed the English Channel as “activist lawyers” trying to “delay and disrupt returns”.

At the Conservative Party conference, Priti Patel referred to “do-gooders” and “lefty lawyers” in a speech on the asylum system.

Boris Johnson also vowed to stop the criminal justice system being “hamstrung” by “lefty human rights lawyers”.

Following the last-minute cancellation of several planned deportations, the Home Office has accused lawyers of “frustrating” attempts to return asylum seekers to mainland Europe by “abusing” the legal framework with last-minute challenges.

Ms Knorr said that the timing of some legal challenges over the summer had been caused by officials giving asylum seekers late notice of their removal.

“People were not being told that they were in the Dublin [Regulation] process until very late in the day,” she added, saying that asylum seekers would make a regular report to a police station and be detained without warning.

“It’s a difficult process and if people are not told in enough time then challenges will necessarily be at the last minute.”

The barrister said that processes had recently been improved, meaning fewer last-minute applications were expected.

Mr Blundell added: “Instances of abuse in my experience are extremely rare. This is an area that is highly politicised and it tends to draw attention more because of that.”

Last week, the most senior judge in England and Wales accused ministers of undermining the rule of law with verbal attacks on lawyers.

The Lord Chief Justice, Lord Burnett of Maldon, said lawyers should not be criticised for “acting fearlessly” for clients after the home secretary was condemned for remarks on “activist lawyers”.

“Identifiable individual failings, unfortunate though they are, do not begin to justify a general attack upon the integrity of groups of lawyers,” he added.

Ms Patel vowed to make crossings across the English Channel “unviable” earlier this year but numbers rocketed to record levels over the summer.

The Home Office has been criticised for labelling asylum seekers who steer boats “people smugglers”, after eight people were jailed.

The Independent revealed that the Crown Prosecution Service issued a note last month confirming the migrants who pilot dinghies can be charged with assisting unlawful immigration, following a debate about whether cases were in the public interest.

Charities have called for the government to provide more safe and legal alternatives to crossing the Channel, after its main refugee resettlement scheme was suspended because of coronavirus.

Its replacement, which was due to come into effect this year, has not yet been announced.

The Home Affairs Committee heard that more than 8,000 migrants have crossed the English Channel so far this year, according to figures compiled by Migration Watch.

But official figures suggest that the overall number of asylum seekers arriving has fallen because of a decrease in other routes during the coronavirus pandemic.

The Home Affairs Committee heard that a “large proportion of people crossing the Channel have genuine claims for protection”.

The most common self-reported nationality is Iranian, followed by Iraqi, Syrian, Afghan and Yemeni.

The committee heard that the UK has accepted asylum applications in 90 per cent of cases from Yemen, 88 per cent from Syria, 73 per cent from Iran, 68 per cent from Afghanistan and half from Iraq.

In the year to June, Germany received the highest number of asylum applications in the EU on 135,000 with the UK ranked fifth on around 40,000, behind Greece, Spain and France.

The UK will leave the Dublin Regulation at the end of the Brexit transition period, meaning asylum seekers cannot be returned to other EU countries held responsible for considering their claim without a bilateral agreement.