In a transformative move for the UK's justice system, every ruling made by immigration judges is now set to be published. This landmark decision, heralded as a major victory for open justice, will end the secrecy surrounding thousands of tribunal cases each year.
A New Era of Transparency
The reform was announced by the Lady Chief Justice, Baroness Carr, the most senior judge in England and Wales, in her 77-page annual report. The initiative directly addresses a series of controversial cases where individuals, including convicted criminals and failed asylum seekers, have used human rights law to block or delay their deportation.
Currently, only rulings from senior judges in the Upper Tribunal are made public. Decisions from the First-tier Tribunal, where the majority of initial immigration and asylum appeals are heard, have remained off the public record. This has made it difficult to scrutinise the reasoning behind many contentious decisions.
'Work on publishing judgments from the First-tier Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber has moved from setting principles to planning how it will work in practice,' Baroness Carr wrote. A scoping exercise to guide the full rollout is expected to be completed within the next three to six months.
Controversial Cases Prompt Change
The push for greater transparency follows several high-profile cases that have drawn public criticism. One such case involved an Albanian criminal, Klevis Disha, who was jailed for handling £300,000 of stolen cash. Despite an order for his deportation from then-Home Secretary Priti Patel, a first-tier tribunal ruled it would be 'unduly harsh' to send him and his son back to Albania. Part of the reasoning cited the son's sensory issues with food, specifically that he 'will not eat the type of chicken nuggets that are available abroad'.
In another case, Albanian drug dealer Roland Matranxhi was permitted to stay in the UK after a judge decided his relationship with his wife might 'dwindle away' if he were deported. Furthermore, a Pakistani paedophile successfully delayed his deportation by arguing that, as an alcoholic, he would be unable to access treatment in Pakistan where drinking is illegal for Muslims.
Political and Public Reaction
The decision has been widely praised as a step towards greater accountability. Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary, described it as a 'small win' that would finally lift the 'veil of secrecy over asylum tribunals'.
'This will finally make it possible to scrutinise all decisions by judges,' he said. 'The public always deserved to know who is being allowed to stay and why.'
This move towards transparency coincides with new government proposals. Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood has vowed to make it harder for foreign criminals or failed asylum seekers to avoid deportation by citing the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Her plans include strengthening the 'public interest test' for Article 8 claims and revising the definition of 'family'. However, these proposals are likely to face legal challenges.
