UNHCR recommendations to the UK Government

Fair and efficient asylum procedures are key to sustaining public confidence and support for refugee protection and the management of mixed population flows.

Long delays in processing asylum claims erode public confidence and make it more difficult to secure the return of those found not to need international protection. The UK made important advances in 2023, determining a record number of initial claims. However, the backlog of those awaiting a first instance decision persists, and the number of cases awaiting adjudication is growing.

Recent innovations now need to be transformed into wider, evidence-based reforms that take account of lessons learned, tackle systemic weaknesses, and build a resilient and adaptable asylum system. Without these, the system will continue to operate in crisis mode, with recurring backlogs.

Process asylum applications as soon as they are made

Successive legislative changes have generated increasingly complex and multi-layered decisionmaking procedures. In particular, the extensive use of inadmissibility procedures in the absence of lawful and operational readmission or third country transfer agreements serves only to delay the processing of asylum claims and increase the strain on public resources. In such circumstances, the process of considering whether a claim can be declared inadmissible and placing those cases on hold for many months is costly and inefficient and should be avoided.

Triage cases into different case processing streams

Efforts have been undertaken in recent years to move away from a ‘one size fits all’ approach to asylum case processing – both in the UK and elsewhere. These provide extensive evidence as to how differentiated processing can work and point to areas where further efficiencies may be found, while ensuring quality decision-making. For example, accelerated and simplified processing should be used for manifestly well-founded cases.

This may include dossier-based decision-making, questionnaires, merging screening and asylum interviews, or targeted interviews using templates and prepopulated decision-making tools. Cases that are clearly not related to the criteria for international protection or that are evidently fraudulent or abusive may also be examined through an accelerated process. In these cases, shorter decision-making timelines can help facilitate the removal of rejected cases.

Frontload screening processes

Well-designed registration and screening processes that capture quality data at the outset are invaluable, inter alia enabling cases to be triaged into differentiated processing models and providing information that can be relied on when making asylum decisions. At present, the variable quality of information gathered at screening in the UK does not meet the requisite level of reliability. Current efforts to address this through training and by redesigning the screening questionnaire are positive, but wider reforms are needed to overcome silos and realise the potentially transformative benefits of a joined-up, streamlined screening and decision-making process. 

Address systemic issues

Quality decision-making relies on well-designed systems and efficient allocation of resources, including for staffing, training, technology, and software systems. It is critical that these operate to support innovation and new case processing methods, rather than limiting options, as is currently the case.

Home Office administrative and information technology systems require significant re-design, to overcome inefficiencies arising from wasted and duplicated work and challenges in retrieving information already collected that could be used for the purposes of triage and decision-making. Currently, some key questions are asked several times - at screening, on questionnaires and during asylum interviews - and the information collected often either cannot be easily relied upon or is not fully accessible to those taking asylum decisions.

The time allocated for an asylum interview should be determined based on the type of claim and likely complexity of information to be gathered, reducing the need for second interviews. With the recent intake of a large number of new decision-makers, further training and coaching are required, especially on interview skills and thematic training on different applicant profiles and nationalities. Assigning the same caseworker to conduct the interview and draft the decision would be more efficient and improve the quality of decisions.

Ensure quality decision making from the outset

Efficiency and quality go hand in hand. A decision is efficient when the correct one is reached as early as possible, without the need for further interview or a lengthy appeals process. Where potential efficiencies are envisaged by reducing asylum interview times, the time allocated to draft a decision and/or the number of training hours provided to staff should be assessed with a view to their impact on decisionmaking quality. In the first quarter of 2024, there was a 330% increase in appeals to the First Tier Tribunal.

In the same period, around half of all asylum decisions considered by the Tribunal were overturned.4 These statistics speak to the need to ensure correct asylum decisions at the initial stage, minimising pressure on the legal sector and the courts

Return those who are not in need of international protection

A cornerstone of a well-functioning asylum system is the return to their own countries of people who have been found not to need international protection nor to have another lawful basis to stay, following due process. This is important to maintain the integrity of the asylum process, sustain public confidence, and to tackle irregular migration and the smuggling and trafficking of persons.

The rapid adjudication of claims and return home of those found not to have protection needs is a strong disincentive to abuse of the asylum system. UNHCR recognises that securing returns frequently involves a range of complex challenges including in relation to bilateral engagement with governments in countries of origin as well as documentation and logistics issues.

This engagement should however be prioritised as an important aspect of wider migration management arrangements. Strengthening assisted voluntary return and reintegration programmes can help ensure sustainable return, while enforced returns may be pursued where necessary, provided they are carried out in accordance with the law, including international human rights standards.

Resettlement offers a sustainable solution for refugees whose protection needs cannot be met in the country where they are currently located, or whose situation remains precarious there. It can also serve as a practical expression of solidarity and responsibility-sharing with countries hosting large refugee populations, helping sustain protection and/ or unlocking solutions for a wider group of refugees.

More generally, safe, regular pathways are key to averting dangerous journeys that expose refugees and migrants to exploitation and other grave risks at the hands of traffickers and smugglers. Despite the clear benefits, only a tiny percentage of refugees worldwide benefit from resettlement each year, given the limited number of places made available by states.

UNHCR estimates that 2 million refugees were in need of resettlement globally in 2023. In comparison, there were only 96,311 resettlement departures that year. Resettlement needs are projected to reach 2.9 million in 2025. More than 36,400 refugees have arrived in the UK as a result of UNHCR resettlement referrals over the last 20 years. This includes some 22,000 Syrian refugees who have arrived since 2015, and have built new lives in communities across the UK.

The UK Resettlement Scheme (UKRS) was launched in 2019 with the intention of extending resettlement to a wider range of nationalities. It subsequently faced multiple setbacks linked to the COVID-19 pandemic, the housing crisis, and wider pressures on reception capacity, in the broader context of a growing number of asylum-seekers awaiting decisions and a large number of arrivals through the Ukraine and Afghan schemes. As the immediate impact of these eases, the potential to resume a world-leading resettlement programme is reemerging.

Commit to a generous, global, multi-year resettlement quota

The UK should establish a predictable, multi-year global resettlement quota for the UKRS, guided by the capacity of local authorities to accommodate and integrate resettled refugees and developed in partnership with them, while also maximizing the potential of community sponsorship. UNHCR continues to advocate that the UK works towards an annual resettlement commitment of 10,000 places. Greater flexibility on the eligibility criteria for the long-standing Mandate resettlement scheme, which allows certain refugees with compelling protection needs to join family members and does not rely on the availability of local authority housing or community sponsorship, would help increase the number of arrivals.

Resolve the backlog of pending UKRS cases by the end of 2024

Approximately 1,100 refugees are awaiting departure to the UK under the UKRS, many of whom have been waiting for up to six years. Current efforts to match these individuals to appropriate local authority or community-sponsored placements are welcome and should be stepped up, and the backlog resolved by the end of 2024 – an ambitious yet reasonable timeframe.

Expand eligibility criteria for refugee family reunification

Safeguarding refugees’ right to family unity through effective family reunification processes aids their integration, promotes emotional well-being, and encourages self-reliance. For many refugees, a durable solution is only achieved when the family is reunited.

The current scope of family reunification rights should be revisited, with a focus on dependency as the core eligibility criterion. This would allow greater access for non-nuclear family compositions, such as siblings in a dependent relationship. Unaccompanied and separated children should be permitted to sponsor their immediate family members. This would help mitigate the damaging impact of family separation and bring the UK in line with the majority of European states.

Refugee family reunification should also be considered for individuals who have travelled to the UK on humanitarian schemes such as the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy (ARAP) and Pathways 1 and 3 of the Afghan Citizens Resettlement (ACRS) schemes and granted leave to remain, albeit without a formal protection status. These schemes are premised on the risk of harm to certain categories of person in their own countries, with leave to travel to and remain in the UK granted accordingly, albeit without a formal determination of refugee status.

Increase flexibility on biometrics requirements for family reunification

Family members abroad applying to reunite with a refugee in the UK often have to undertake dangerous journeys, including making irregular border crossings, to submit biometrics in line with UK policy. Flexibility around such requirements (for example, through the involvement of third party entities and/or cooperation with other embassies where there is no UK diplomatic presence) and expanded access to support and advice in locations along mixed migration routes6 would enable more refugees to exercise their right to family unity and reduce the risk of their undertaking irregular and dangerous journeys.

Expand complementary pathways and add protection safeguards

Complementary pathways that allow refugees to move beyond countries of asylum or transit through safe, regular channels, including labour mobility schemes (such as the UK’s Displaced Talent Mobility Pilot) and education pathways offer considerable potential but have not yet been brought to scale in the UK.

Existing pathways should be strengthened, and new ones developed together with businesses and universities, assisted by more flexible entry requirements and administrative procedures, as well as engagement with host governments on readmission possibilities. Safeguards to protect against refoulement should be pursued across all pathways.

Investment in refugee integration benefits both refugees and the communities receiving them. It enables refugees to rebuild their lives, realise their potential and contribute to the social, economic and cultural life of their communities.

Integration is made possible in practice primarily through action at the sub-national and local level, and through the engagement of a wide range of actors and entities across society – cities and local authorities, schools and universities, businesses, religious institutions, through sports, music and the arts. The recommendations of the recent report by the Commission on the Integration of Refugees provide an important blueprint for a new approach to refugee integration.

The report, inter alia, makes a compelling case for investing in quality language and employment support, projecting an overall net economic benefit to the UK of £1.2 billion within five years if asylum applications are processed quickly and up-front investments in English language provision and employment support are made.

Pursue a holistic approach to refugee integration

Local delivery must be underpinned and enabled through national level leadership and coordination, a solid partnership across all levels of government, and a coherent set of goals and resourcing instruments oriented towards integration from as early a stage as possible. These could be done through the development of a national refugee integration compact, that sets out key principles and parameters and reinforces local control over funding and delivery of services, drawing inspiration from the rich experience and lessons generated in recent years.

A national compact that gives space for local realities can provide a coherent and comprehensive approach to integration while empowering local actors, communities, and refugees. Currently, integration support is designed and delivered through a range of funding streams and delivery modalities, depending on the pathway or scheme through which a refugee has secured protection in the UK. A national, whole of government compact should also help drive greater coherence in this respect, realising efficiencies and overcoming disparities in support.

Adopt an integration orientation from the outset

The integration journey is experienced very differently by refugees entering the UK through resettlement or bespoke schemes, and those who have sought asylum directly. For the latter group, their integration prospects are significantly shaped (and often hindered) by their experiences of the asylum system.

Reception policies are more effective if they are guided by the potential longer-term outcomes of the asylum process: the integration of asylum-seekers who are ultimately recognised as refugees and the sustainable return and reintegration of those whose claims are unsuccessful. Fast, fair and efficient asylum procedures play a key role in enabling these outcomes – long waiting times are in no-one’s interest.

Reception and accommodation policies in the UK should be designed to minimise isolation and promote autonomy and resilience, improving mental health and enhancing language acquisition and cultural adaptation. Detention should be used only on an exceptional and individual basis as a measure of last resort, for legitimate purposes, such as for conducting identity checks or where there are risks to public health or security, and where no alternatives are available.

Asylum-seekers should be given the right to work after six months if their claims are not determined within that time - in line with European neighbours such as France and Germany. Access to the labour market empowers asylum-seekers to become active members of society, increases their chances of successful integration in the UK if they are subsequently granted protection, reduces reception costs, and benefits the local economy. The right to work should be automatic, unrestricted and extended to dependants. Access to language training should also be provided from the outset of the asylum procedure. Measures should also be pursued to address the damaging impact of the abrupt transition out of Home Office support when refugee status is granted.

Tackle hate speech and misinformation

Globally, there is a growing number of situations where harmful information is targeting refugees, and the UK is not immune from mis/disinformation and hate speech. In some cases, it is clear that it has been part of coordinated, organised campaigns, on and off-line. The Government can lead by example through positive and factual language and messaging.

It is self-evident that refugee and mixed migratory flows, by their very nature cross-border, require cooperation between states to manage them effectively. The preamble to the Refugee Convention highlights that solutions to refugee situations can only be secured through international cooperation, and the Global Compact on Refugees sets out a framework for more predictable and equitable responsibility-sharing.

Renew UK partnership with Europe on asylum

Since the UK’s departure from the European Union (EU), there has been no formal framework for UK-EU cooperation on asylum-related matters. Bilateral arrangements since then, including with France, Belgium, Italy and other states, have focused on preventing Channel crossings and intervening ‘upstream’ to tackle people trafficking and smuggling through intelligence-gathering and law enforcement and reduce irregular movements. Globally, UNHCR consistently notes the importance of regional cooperation to effectively manage mixed flows and enable good border management while providing access to international protection.

UNHCR therefore encourages that deeper collaboration between the UK and the EU and its Member States be explored, potentially through reciprocal arrangements that would allow for transfers to the UK from the EU of some asylum-seekers (for example, for family reunification), while also enabling some readmissions to EU Member States from the UK. Such arrangements should be pursued in the spirit of collaborative asylum management and linked to cooperation ‘upstream’.

Pursue a route-based approach to address mixed migration

The UK is also encouraged to work with other European states and the EU, with the support of UNHCR and key partners, to develop a comprehensive set of interventions in relation to mixed movements along key migratory routes towards and through the EU to the UK.

These would include the Central Mediterranean route and the Western Balkan land route, and should engage countries of origin, transit countries, and countries of destination in Europe including the UK. Such interventions should aim to assist refugees and migrants to find protection, solutions, and legal pathways at the earliest possible stage – reducing human suffering on dangerous journeys, and offering effective, rights-based alternatives to externalisation proposals and practices.

This ‘route-based approach’ requires simultaneous interventions along key routes, rather than a set of options to be selectively taken up by governments. It includes host and transit countries, across the humanitarian and development nexus with partner countries affected by mixed flows through those regions. This engagement should respond to the immediate needs of people on the move and develop effective longer term protection responses to preserve access to safety for refugees and rights-based solutions for migrants. It should aim to build the capacity of state authorities over time, allowing them to increasingly assume their responsibilities in relation to migrants and refugees, with continued support from the UK and the wider international community.

Solidarity with countries along routes can also be demonstrated by scaling up resettlement commitments and complementary pathways for refugees, and legal pathways for migrants, and by providing access to information, advice and referrals at key locations – including on family reunification for both groups.

Invest in refugee inclusion in host countries, and solutions back home

The UK has played an important leadership role over many decades in extending humanitarian and development support to countries hosting large refugee populations, mobilising international action to resolve refugee crises, and seeking innovative solutions, as demonstrated through its ambitious pledges at the 2023 Global Refugee Forum (GRF).

Efforts have however been constrained by recent reductions in overseas aid, including as a result of Official Development Assistance (ODA) funds being applied to domestic refugee support costs. The Government is therefore encouraged to renew its commitment to ambitious multilateral engagement – political and financial – and use its global standing to help uphold refugee protection and find solutions to forced displacement and mixed migratory flows.

A restoration of aid spending to 0.7% of national income would signal a renewed and substantive UK commitment to international development cooperation. There are many opportunities to support inclusion of refugees and to strengthen host countries and communities. UNHCR has witnessed the transformation that concrete development action can bring when smartly joined up with humanitarian responses - bringing in development aid right at the start of emergencies, in lockstep with humanitarian aid, and investing in sustainable programming from the outset.

A more predictable role by development actors in direct support to governments is key to making the initial response sustainable. The UK has an important role to play in accelerating this shift – including through its bilateral development work, its position in key international financial institutions and by promoting private sector investment. Swift and robust implementation of the UK’s GRF pledges is also key.

For information about specific legislation relating to asylum in the UK, and for UNHCR statements and legal observations, please see the relevant page:

• UK-Rwanda Asylum Partnership
• The Illegal Migration Act
• Nationality and Borders Act