Hosted by www.ijjo.org

SEEKING ASYLUM ALONE | UNITED KINGDOM
144
decided with the same speed as adult cases but if
we assume that the majority 2 claim asylum six to
12 months before their appeals are heard, some
very broad conclusions can be drawn. In 2003, 3,180
unaccompanied or separated children applied for
asylum and in 2004, 2,887 unaccompanied or separated
children applied for asylum. 3 Given the very
low child asylum acceptance rate, there were about
3,000 potential appeals from unaccompanied or
separated children in either year. 4 Yet only 2,145 or
around 71% of unaccompanied or separated children
in fact appealed against decisions refusing them asylum
between October 2003 and November 2004,
compared to the adult appeal rate of 80% in 2003. 5
12.1 The Right to Appeal
The relatively low figure is partly a consequence
of the increasing restriction of children’s
appeal rights over the research period. The
remaining right of appeal is under section 82 of the
Nationality, Immigration and Asylum Act 2002. This
appeal is to an independent appellate body funded
by the Department of Constitutional Affairs and
not the Home Office. As a result, and by contrast
with other jurisdictions where the decision making
and reviewing department is the same, here the government
department responsible for making the
initial decision to refuse asylum is not in charge of
the appeal process but merely a party to any appeal.
Unaccompanied or separated children are subject
to the same legislation and rules of procedure
as adult appellants. Until 4 April 2005, there were
two tiers of appeal. The first tier of the Immigration
Appellate Authority consisted of an adjudicator sitting
alone and the second tier was three adjudicators
sitting as the Immigration Appeal Tribunal. There
were further possible rights of appeal on points of
law to the Court of Appeal and the House of Lords.
In April 2005, the two lower tiers were amalgamated
into the one tier Asylum and Immigration Tribunal,
although there were provisions for an internal reconsideration
within the Asylum and Immigration
Tribunal of an initial decision by an Immigration Judge
on points of law. The reconsideration process is cumbersome.
First of all a written application requesting
a reconsideration has to be made to the Tribunal
itself. If this is not successful, a further written application
can be made to the High Court. If either the
Tribunal or the High Court decide that the Immigration
Judge has erred in law in his or her initial
decision, the appeal is referred back to a panel of
more senior Immigration Judges for a reconsideration
hearing. If that reconsideration hearing is
unsuccessful, there is a right of appeal on a point
of law only to the Court of Appeal. A further appeal
lies from there to the House of Lords but only in
cases which raise an important point of law of
wider significance. There is however a built in and
significant disincentive within the new appeal system
as funding for making applications for reconsideration
to the Asylum and Immigration Tribunal and
the High Court is only granted retrospectively and
depends upon the outcome of any reconsideration.
Certain categories of unaccompanied or
separated children have no or very restricted rights
of appeal.
Children who have applied for asylum elsewhere
in the European Union, who do not have a parent
or legal guardian legally present in the U.K. and
who have not been permitted to make an asylum
application in the U.K. on humanitarian grounds 6
are not even permitted to apply for asylum in the
U.K. In such cases, no right of appeal can arise.
Other unaccompanied or separated children are
entitled to make an application for asylum in the
U.K. but are not entitled to an “in country” right of
Hosted by www.ijjo.org