THE Home Office decision to house illegal migrants in a former army base was made “unlawfully”, the High Court has been told.
The department had “secret” plans to accommodate up to 540 men at the former barracks in a sleepy village in East Sussex, despite repeated protests from outraged locals.
Now the Home Office faces legal action from Crowborough Shield, a community interest company for the village.
The company claimed the Home Office’s decision-making process, which saw groups of migrants quietly moved into the army base at night time in January, amounted to an “abuse of power“.
Alex Goodman KC, for Crowborough Shield, said in written submissions that the Home Office had “stonewalled” responses from furious residents.
He added that locals involved in Crowborough Shield “do not know the basis for or the reasons” for the department’s decision, meaning the Home Office had failed to exercise its powers “with the degree of openness required”.
He continued: “The rights of individuals are not to be overridden by hole-in-the-corner decisions or stonewall responses to requests for information about how decisions are being taken.”
The level of secrecy the department operated under “is unlawfully inconsistent with the constitutional principle that requires the state to communicate the process by which decisions affecting the rights of individuals are made” he added.
He said residents claim there was “no public consultation of any kind” and are concerned by the “public expenditure”.
The barrister also claimed that the Home Office wrongly decided that the need to accommodate asylum seekers constituted an “emergency” under planning rules, meaning it was automatically granted permission to develop the site.
He argued that the “emergency” status was not valid as hotels could still be used to house asylum seeks.
“If the Home Office is to rely on emergency powers… then there must be a situation of genuine emergency rather than just urgency” he told the court.
This decision to use the barracks followed Labour’s pledge to use former military barracks as accommodation for asylum seekers, in a bid to end the use of hotels by the next election.
The department first announced that it was considering using the site in October last year.
This sparked mass protests, with one march of 600 protesters carrying numbered cards – one for each asylum seeker due to move in there from the end of this month.
The locals said they fear for the safety of women and children as well as the extra pressure on local services.
Despite outcry the move was later confirmed in January.
Photos of the site show dormitories kitted out for arrivals and communal halls where asylum seekers will receive meals.
The Government has said all asylum seekers will have been screened against policing, criminality and immigration databases and will have completed initial health checks before arriving.
Security staff are on site 24/7 with CCTV and all residents have to sign in and out of the site when they want to leave.
The site was previously used to accommodate Afghan families evacuated during the withdrawal from Kabul in 2021 while they were resettled elsewhere.
Crowborough Shield previously filed a legal challenge over the move in December.
Mr Justice Mould dismissed this in February, stating that the group had “jumped the gun” by filing before the Government decided to proceed with plans to use the site.
He did admit that the government’s decision was open to challenge “at least in principle”.
James Strachan KC, for the Home Office, said in written submissions that Crowborough Shield’s “real complaint is that the Home Office should not have used the camp for asylum accommodation”.
But he added: “That is not a legitimate ground of challenge.”
He countered that the residents’ claims that the decision-making process was not open to public scrutiny “lacks any proper foundation” and the locals allegations of secrecy were similarly “legally incoherent”.
The barrister said any decision maker would be required to produce a “running commentary on its internal thinking”.
He added that “the pressures on the asylum accommodation system are real and acute”.
The UK’s asylum system was facing “severe strain”, he said, with over 400,000 claims lodged since 2021 and around 112,000 people currently receiving state-funded support – the majority of whom are in asylum accommodation.
The hearing before Mr Justice Mould is due to conclude on Wednesday.
