Six asylum seekers who have filed a lawsuit against “appalling” conditions in a disused army barracks have won their lawsuit against the Home Office.
The group hosted at Napier Barracks in Kent had claimed the facilities were “inhumane” and “dangerous”.
The court ruled that the accommodation was “unsuitable” for asylum seekers, that the Home Office’s process for selecting people to house in the barracks was “flawed and illegal”, and that residents were illegally there. detained under “presumptions COVID rules”.
The complaint was lodged by the group who stayed at Folkestone Barracks between September 2020 and February 2021.
In his judgment, Judge Linden said they were all “vulnerable victims of trafficking and / or torture, who suffered a deterioration in their mental health as a result of their accommodation at Napier Barracks”.
They were transferred to another accommodation after the opening of legal proceedings.
Majid, a young Iranian asylum seeker, now lives in a hotel in London, but has spent more than four months in the barracks.
He told Sky News that he still suffered from bouts of depression from his time in Napier.
Majid (left) speaking to Sky’s Mark White about the aftermath of his time in Napier
During a two-day hearing in April, the men’s lawyers said housing asylum seekers in the “squalid” barracks was a violation of their human rights and could amount to bogus imprisonment.
And on Thursday, Judge Linden ruled in their favor and found the Home Office had acted illegally in deciding the old military camp was appropriate.
He said: “Whether based on the COVID or fire safety issues taken in isolation, or looking at the cumulative effect of the decision making and conditions in the fire station, I do not accept that accommodation y guaranteed a standard of living that was sufficient to …
More information about this article Read More
Source: news.sky.com
This notice was published: 2021-06-03 09:38:00
