A High Court judge has temporarily stopped the deportation of an Eritrean asylum seeker under the UK one in one out asylum scheme, raising concerns that sending the trafficking victim back to France could seriously harm his mental health and wellbeing.
The ruling marks a significant legal development in challenges to the controversial migration agreement between the United Kingdom and France, which aims to deter migrants from crossing the English Channel in small boats.
The UK one in one out asylum scheme allows authorities to return asylum seekers who arrive in Britain via small boats to France, while simultaneously permitting another asylum seeker to enter the UK through a legal route.
However, the High Court decision suggests the policy may face legal scrutiny in cases involving vulnerable individuals such as trafficking victims.
Judge halts deportation of trafficking victim
In the ruling, Mr Justice Sheldon ordered that the Eritrean man’s removal to France be suspended pending a full court hearing scheduled for April.
The asylum seeker, aged 31, has been officially recognised by UK authorities as a victim of trafficking.
He was previously detained and exploited by militia groups in Libya before reaching Europe.
The judge determined that returning him to France could expose him to serious risks, particularly due to concerns about his mental health.
Medical assessments have confirmed that the man suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and requires ongoing mental health support.
Justice Sheldon concluded that there is a strong possibility that forcing him back to France could worsen his condition.
Concerns over access to healthcare and accommodation
In his judgment, the court highlighted potential obstacles the man could face if returned to France under the UK one in one out asylum scheme.
The judge found that individuals returned through the programme may struggle to access housing and healthcare in the French system.
He also noted that the man previously attempted to claim asylum in France but did not receive support.
The court determined there was a “serious risk” that the same situation could occur again if he were forcibly returned.
Trafficking victim status may not be recognised
Another concern raised by the court relates to the recognition of trafficking victims by French authorities.
Justice Sheldon said the Eritrean asylum seeker may not be recognised as a trafficking victim in France.
This is because the trafficking he experienced occurred outside French territory and involved non-French actors.
As a result, the man could face difficulties accessing specialist support services for trafficking survivors.
The judge concluded that this gap in recognition could prevent him from receiving necessary protection and assistance.
Legal challenge against deportation policy
The Eritrean asylum seeker is one of three individuals who have launched legal challenges against removal under the UK one in one out asylum scheme.
The ages of the other two applicants in the case are currently disputed, and their claims will be examined separately in future hearings.
For now, the court’s interim decision only applies to the Eritrean man’s deportation.
However, legal experts say the ruling could influence how similar cases are handled.
Lawyers highlight concerns over French system
Elizabeth Cole, a solicitor at Duncan Lewis representing the asylum seeker, welcomed the judge’s decision.
She said the court had acknowledged weaknesses in how trafficking victims may be identified and supported in France.
Cole explained that some victims trafficked outside France by non-French nationals may not be recognised by the French system.
This could limit their access to housing, healthcare and other forms of assistance.
She said the interim ruling represents an important step toward recognising the potential consequences of returning vulnerable individuals under the policy.
Government defends migration policy
The Home Office defended the UK one in one out asylum scheme, saying the government remains committed to tackling illegal migration.
A spokesperson said modern slavery protections should not be misused to undermine border controls.
The department emphasised that safeguarding considerations are assessed before removal decisions are made.
Officials also stated that individuals subject to the scheme are treated with dignity and respect throughout the process.
The French interior ministry has been contacted for comment regarding the concerns raised in the court ruling.
Overview of the “one in, one out” migration scheme
The UK one in one out asylum scheme was introduced last summer as part of a bilateral agreement between the UK and France.
Under the policy, migrants who cross the English Channel to Britain in small boats can be returned to France.
In exchange, the UK agrees to accept an equivalent number of asylum seekers from France through legal resettlement routes.
The initiative was designed to discourage irregular migration across the Channel.
Migration statistics since the scheme began
Government figures show that as of 5 March, approximately 370 asylum seekers had entered the UK legally under the arrangement.
During the same period, 354 migrants had been returned to France.
Despite the policy’s introduction, Channel crossings have continued.
Thousands of migrants have attempted the journey since the programme began.
In the current month alone, around 1,200 people have crossed the Channel in small boats, highlighting the ongoing challenge facing authorities.
Trafficking and migration through Libya
The case also reflects wider concerns about the exploitation of migrants travelling through North Africa.
Many asylum seekers passing through Libya have reported being detained, abused or trafficked by armed groups and smuggling networks.
Human rights organisations have repeatedly warned about widespread violence and forced labour in migrant detention centres in Libya.
Survivors often suffer long-term psychological trauma after reaching Europe.
Broader legal scrutiny of migration policies
The High Court ruling could become an important test case for the UK one in one out asylum scheme.
Legal experts say courts increasingly face complex questions about how migration policies interact with protections for trafficking victims and vulnerable asylum seekers.
The final hearing scheduled for April will examine the legal arguments in greater detail.
Depending on the outcome, the case could influence how the policy is applied in future deportation decisions.
For now, the ruling highlights the growing legal and humanitarian debate surrounding efforts to control irregular migration across the English Channel.