The government acted ‘unlawfully’ over its detention of vulnerable migrants at an ex-RAF base, a High Court judge has ruled.
Four former residents of RAF Wethersfield brought legal action against the Home Office for their stay between July 2023 and February 2024.
In a 136-page ruling today, Mr Justice Mould found there had been ‘a most serious and inexplicable omission’ in failing to assess the impact on disabled asylum seekers and those with serious mental health issues when changing the asylum accommodation policy.
This meant vulnerable asylum seekers with special needs or disabilities could be judged suitable to be accommodated at Wethersfield, the judge said.
Four men who stayed at the base near Braintree, Essex, argued the Home Office acted unlawfully by housing them at the site when it was ‘not suitable’ because of characteristics which included being victims of torture and human trafficking or being disabled.
The Home Office opposed the challenge, saying its allocation system was ‘not incapable of being operated lawfully’.
But Mr Justice Mould found the Home Office was in breach of its duty in failing to assess the impact of policy change on asylum seekers with special needs.
He said: ‘In my judgment, the claimants’ case is plainly well-founded.’
Boarded up former RAF military accommodation units pictured at what is now the MDP Wethersfield Ministry of Defence facility on July 24, 2024 in Wethersfield
Temporary accommodation units housing migrants are pictured on the MDP Wethersfield Ministry of Defence facility on July 24, 2024 in Wethersfield
The village has a population of 707 people, the Home Office plans to boost the number of migrants at MDP Wethersfield to 800
The judge made reference to the equality impact assessment saying it ‘makes no attempt to assess the equalities implications’ of the proposed policy change, which means asylum seekers with disabilities or serious mental health issues may be judged to be suitable for accommodation at Wethersfield.
He said: ‘In this case, the only conclusion I am able to reach on evidence is that the defendant did not attempt to assess the equalities impacts of the proposed policy change.’
The judge also found the Home Secretary acted unlawfully and in breach of her duties under the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 in relation to three of the men.
Barristers for the men had claimed the accommodation was ‘seriously inadequate’ and there was a ‘structural and systemic failure’ to identify vulnerabilities which would exclude people from being housed there.
However, the High Court in London found the Home Secretary’s updated policies and procedures for identifying asylum seekers unsuitable for Wethersfield, was now capable of operating lawfully.
He added: ‘I do not accept that the conditions of accommodation provided for asylum seekers at Wethersfield as described in the evidence before the court have been shown to be so deficient as to be incapable of providing adequate accommodation for asylum seekers.’
In respect of one of the men, a 25-year-old Eritrean national who cannot be named, the judge found he had been ‘unlawfully accommodated’ at Wethersfield as the home secretary failed ‘to have regard to credible evidence that he was the victim of human trafficking’.
The then-Conservative government announced plans to house migrants at Wethersfield, as well as RAF Scampton in Lincolnshire, in March 2023.
The quiet picture-postcard village in the Home Counties is home to the UK’s biggest facility for asylum seekers based at a former RAF HQ
Migrants began to be housed at Wethersfield last July, with capacity currently capped at 580 despite initial plans to accommodate 1,700 people.
Clare Jennings of Gold Jennings, who represented one of the men, said: ‘We are delighted that the High Court has acknowledged the significant failings in the treatment of our client, TG, by the home secretary, and the detrimental impact that being in Wethersfield had on his already fragile mental health.
‘We are concerned that the continued use of large, ex-military sites, to house asylum seekers remains highly problematic and puts vulnerable people at risk.’
Emily Soothill of DPG, who represented another of the men, said: ‘People seeking asylum, especially victims of torture and trafficking, are more vulnerable to physical and mental illness.
‘They have the right to be treated with dignity and should not be accommodated en masse in military barracks.’
Previously the four migrants also claimed they were caged in ‘prison-like’ conditions at the base which they said was plagued by scabies and where inhabitants would fight one another in food queues.
Barristers representing the four men, who all stayed at the former airbase between July 2023 and February 2024, claimed the block was ‘seriously inadequate’ and that gunfire from a nearby shooting range had triggered ‘traumatic’ memories for some.
The Home Office admitted housing one of the men at the site was unlawful but said this was an ‘individual error’, and that the base ‘reasonably appeared adequate’ for the other three.
Since the base began to take asylum seekers in July 2023, house sales have all-but dried up in Wethersfield. Pictured are two migrants walking towards their former RAF base
Angus McCullough KC, representing three of the men, said: ‘Our case is not that Wethersfield is necessarily unsuitable for all, but that it is unsuitable for those who are vulnerable.’
Migrants began to be housed at Wethersfield in July 2023, with capacity currently capped at 580 despite initial plans to accommodate 1,700 people.
The site has since proved controversial with residents saying they would soon be outnumbered by asylum seekers housed at a former RAF airfield next door.
While the village has a population of 707 people, the Home Office plans to boost the number of migrants at MDP Wethersfield to 800, which locals complain is far too many for the local infrastructure to bear.
Those living nearest the base, which was previously the Ministry of Defence Police (MDP) HQ, and before that a WW2 RAF and US airbase, say their houses are now unsaleable.
Retired decorator, William John, 72, who has lived in Wethersfield for more than 40 years, agreed the village cannot manage the influx.
‘It’s a tricky subject, because if you raise any objection, people say you are racist, but I’m really not.
‘They’re going to raise the number of people to 800 which is more than the population of the village, and we just can’t cope with it.
Villagers say they don’t feel safe at night with the asylum seekers roaming the streets
‘There was an incident recently where some of the young men from the centre were sitting watching the children’s playground, which made the mums feel nervous.
‘And when they left, some of the asylum seekers appeared to follow them in which made people feel even more uncomfortable.’
