Tories admit immigration laws chaos
By DAVID BARRETT Home Affairs Correspondent
THE HOME Office is to review a central plank of human rights law in an admission that it is causing serious damage to Britain's border controls.
A consultation paper to be issued within days will open up a debate on the future of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees "the right to a family life", which is increasingly being used by foreign criminals and illegal immigrants to dodge deportation.
A highly-placed source told The Sunday Telegraph the issue would be raised in a paper on immigration to be published by Theresa May, the Home Secretary, before Parliament breaks up for the summer.
It comes as this newspaper can disclose a new Article 8 test case has created a "loophole" which could allow thousands of asylum seekers granted the right to stay in Britain under the Government's "back door amnesty" to bring their families to this country.
Last week, a separate court ruling left the Home Office unable to deport more than 200 Somali immigrants, most of them criminals, after judges in Strasbourg decided sending them home would breach Article 3 of the convention, which bans inhumane treatment. The serial offender who brought the case told this newspaper he is ashamed of his criminal record and wants to lead a law-abiding life in Britain.
The issue of immigration has also divided the Cabinet. Downing Street has rejected a plan by Mrs May to put a cap on the number of foreign students allowed to work after they finish their studies in Britain, after resistance from Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister, and Michael Gove, the Education Secretary.
The developments make it harder for the Coalition to meet its pledges to tighten UK border controls and cut immigration, after figures last week showed Britain's population was growing at its fastest rate for half a century.
The review of Article 8 will ensure the law is applied in a "more balanced way", the source said, after a string of cases in which criminals have escaped being sent back to their homelands by claiming they had the right to a family life in the UK. They have included a drug dealer from the Caribbean who beat his partner and failed to pay child maintenance, and a Sri Lankan robber whose only claim to "family life" was he had a girlfriend here.
This newspaper has campaigned for a review of the legislation. It is the first time the Government has indicated that Article 8 needs to be re-examined, and opens the way towards full reform of the law.
The Government source said that including Article 8 in a forthcoming consultation paper on "family immigration rights" should be taken as a "clear signal" ministers are alarmed by the situation.
Our campaign, launched in April, has called on David Cameron to review the laws that cite Article 8 with a view to removing the family life defence from legislation.
The Government source expressed concern about a new test case ruling, in which Article 8 was used by an asylum seeker to win permission to bring her family to Britain. The woman was one of the 161,000 permitted to stay in Britain under the "legacy" scheme after their files were lost in a Home Office blunder. Critics have called the scheme a "back door amnesty".
Like most asylum-seekers who have benefited from the legacy scheme, the woman was not awarded full refugee status, which confers rights to bring dependants to Britain, but instead was given the lesser status of "indefinite leave to remain", which does not. Officials fear the ruling could open the door to more asylum-seekers to bring their families to Britain.
The test case centres on a woman who fled war-torn Burundi in 2003 and claimed asylum in Britain. After a long delay, Peace Musabi's case was considered under the legacy scheme and she was granted indefinite leave to remain. Now she has won a key victory granting her three children permission to come to Britain on Article 8 grounds.
Last week a similar case was brought by Jeto Titti, a mother of three who fled Rwanda in 2002. The judge was still considering the verdict in her case this weekend.
Both cases open the prospect of less-deserving applicants bringing similar claims in future.
Dominic Raab, a Conservative MP, said: "Yet again, inflated interpretations of the right to family life risk undermining all attempts to bring immigration under control.
"This review is an opportunity for the Coalition to tackle a problem the last Government created."
