Home UK Immigration Concerns over ‘dangerous precedent’ after Court of Session rules Serco lock-change evictions lawful

Concerns over ‘dangerous precedent’ after Court of Session rules Serco lock-change evictions lawful

by admin

Author- Jenni Davidson

Concerns have been raised over the “dangerous precedent” and “profound consequences” for human rights after the Court of Session ruled that Serco’s eviction of former asylum seekers in Glasgow was lawful.

The judgment from the inner house of the Court of Session backs up an earlier ruling that Home Office contractor Serco did not act unlawfully by evicting failed asylum seekers without a court order.

Normally it would be unlawful to carry out an eviction in Scotland without a court order, but in a test case, the court ruled that the former asylum seeker, Shakar Omar Ali, was not a tenant as she did not have a lease or any obligation to pay rent since she had been housed temporarily by the Home Office only for the duration of her asylum case, which had now ended.

It also ruled that the threat of eviction did not meet the “minimum level of severity” to be considered a breach of human rights, and that some of the claim rested on the “erroneous assertion” that she was still an asylum seeker.

Contrary to the previous court ruling, it also said that Serco could not be considered a public body and therefore the Human Rights Act did not apply to its actions.

Scottish charities and public bodies have said they will now have to consider how to respond to the ruling.

The case dates back to summer 2018 when Serco began to serve rejected asylum seekers in Glasgow with eviction notices, warning them that locks on the properties would be changed.

The company had a contract with the Home Office to provide accommodation to asylum seekers, but the Home Office funding to cover the cost of accommodating them ended when their cases were rejected, leaving the company housing them for free.

Serco’s plans to evict around 300 former asylum seekers were paused after it was challenged in court, but they are expected to go ahead following today’s ruling.

Commenting on the judgment, Judith Robertson, chair of the Scottish Human Rights Commission, said: “We have serious concerns about the implications of this ruling, both for the people directly affected and for the protection of human rights more broadly.

“The court’s finding that Serco is not acting as a public authority in this context, and therefore is not bound by human rights legal obligations, has profound consequences for how people’s rights are protected when public services are delivered by private providers.

“This is an area of law that, in our view, requires further clarification.

“Governments should not be able to divest themselves of their human rights obligations by outsourcing the provision of public services.

“There is potential for further legal proceedings on this point and the commission will consider the most appropriate next course of action.”

Sabir Zazai, chief executive at Scottish Refugee Council, said: “We’re bitterly disappointed by today’s decision.

“This galling verdict leaves hundreds of men and women in Glasgow at risk of lock-change evictions and immediate street homelessness. People are very anxious and very stressed.

“On top of this, there is already a homelessness crisis in Glasgow that this decision will only contribute to.

“Our advisers are working as hard as they can to provide advice and support.

“We are collaborating with organisations across Glasgow to try to provide emergency shelter and services, but we need the whole city of Glasgow to step up urgently in response to this.

“We are also pushing for fundamental and urgent reform to the UK’s asylum system.


Related Articles