Assessments on two young men, carried out by social workers who were employed by the Home Office at the Kent intake unit (KIU) in Dover, did not adhere to adequate safeguards, judge Mr Justice Henshaw ruled.
The claimants, known as MA and HT, were interviewed between December 2020 and January 2021 at the KIU without an appropriate adult present, the court heard.
-
Analysis: Questions on revamped national child asylum transfer scheme
-
Best practice: Peer support for young migrants and refugees
The claimants were also denied the opportunity to know why their claimed age was being disputed by the social workers and to explain any inconsistencies in their account.
Concerns were raised by Mr Justice Henshaw and the Refugee Council, which supported the claimants, over the fact that the assessment took place just hours after the arrival of MA and HT.
The Refugee Council argued that “children and young people are exhausted, often frightened, unsure as to who they are talking to, whether they are safe, and what is going to happen to them next”,
“They have just endured a very frightening experience and this is not the time or the place to be conducting interviews, the outcome of which has a very significant impact on their lives,” the organisation said.
Mr Justice Henshaw also ruled that the extension of the detention of both claimants by a number of days at the site to conduct further assessments was unlawful.
MA told social workers he was 16 after being found by Kent Police at a petrol station but following an 42 minute-long age assessment on the same day was deemed to be 20.
HT said he was 17 when he arrived in Dover on a dinghy but was deemed to be 21 following an hour-long assessment by social workers less than four hours after his arrival.
Both were assessed as adults and subsequently held in immigration detention centres for three and four days following their arrival on 15 December 2020 and 10 January 2021 respectively.
HT was later accepted to be a child at the time of his claim, while MA was judged to be an adult following a detailed age assessment by Coventry council social workers, the court heard.
The KIU guidance, which was issued in September 2020 and updated in December 2020, before being withdrawn on 14 January this year, allowed social workers to carry out age assessments if they felt the immigration staff’s view that the claimant was aged over 25 was wrong but they believed the person was “potentially clearly an adult”.
It also allowed tests to be carried out if they believed the person was “potentially clearly an adult” but immigration staff did not feel that their appearance very strongly suggested they were over 25.
The guidance also referred to social workers undertaking “short Merton compliant age assessments” in either of these circumstances based on full Merton compliant age assessments routinely carried out during age disputes.
The Home Office has said it will apply to appeal the ruling.
A spokesman said: “We are disappointed by the court’s decision. The government is committed to protecting children and the vulnerable but we cannot allow asylum seeking adults claim to be children – this presents a serious safeguarding risk.”
The ruling comes after the Home Office revealed plans to use “scientific” age assessments including MRI scans and x-rays during age disputes.
