Deport first, appeal later deemed unlawful and breach of human rights!

In a landmark case concerning two foreign national criminals, the Supreme Court has today ruled that deporting foreign criminals before their chance to appeal is not only unlawful, but a breach of international human rights.

Described as a ‘hammer blow’ to the governments  notorious  ‘deport first, appeal later’, appeals will now have to be conducted with the Appellant in the UK as ‘deport first, appeal later’  has been deemed an in-effective and unlawful policy.

Clive Coleman legal affairs correspondent for the BBC writes more here:


‘Deport first, appeal later’ was first introduced as part of the Immigration Act 2014 with the Conservative Party pledging to extend this  in their 2015 Party manifesto.

Unless foreign criminals could show a ‘real risk of serious and irreversible harm’, their right to appeal in the UK was officially removed. Since it’s introduction in 2014 more than 1,100 foreign criminals have been removed from Britain.

However in a case concerning two men, Kevin Kiaire, from Kenya, and Courtney Byndloss, from Jamaica, both convicted of  drug offences, the Supreme Court today found that having to appeal from abroad denied the men an effective appeal.

It was also found that the men and their legal representatives would face difficulties in giving and receiving information if forced to do so remotely, as a factor in giving an effective appeal is the ability to give live evidence.

Supreme Court Ruling 

Furthermore, the ruling states that the Ministry of Justice had failed to provide facilities abroad to enable the men to give evidence live on screen and that the financial and legal barriers for this was insurmountable.

Therefore, the men had been deported without any human-rights  system in place that would enable them to conduct their appeal.

The Supreme Court ruling stressed that the Home Secretary had breached the Appellants  human rights by deporting them before they could bring an appeal in Britain and without making proper provision for them to take part in appeal from abroad.

This could now open up an avenue for Appellant’s to challenge the decisions made  by the Home Office on Section 94B Certifications as there are many people that suffer from this, if you have been involved with such a case then you need to contact us now so that we can help you with your case.

Read about the full Supreme Court ruling here: R (on the application of Kiarie) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) R (on the application of Byndloss) (Appellant) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (Respondent) [2017] UKSC 42