High Court finds the government acted unlawfully in making policy changes affecting survivors of torture and trafficking
Alongside Freedom from Torture (FfT), we have succeeded in our legal challenge to the changes made by the Home Office to its 'Allocation of Asylum Accommodation' policy. These changes, introduced in February 2024, forced survivors of trafficking, torture and other serious forms of violence to share rooms with strangers.
The Court found that the government acted unlawfully by failing to consult the Helen Bamber Foundation (HBF) and FfT before making fundamental changes to this critical policy, which determines how and where people seeking protection are housed by the Home Office during their asylum claim. The government also failed to assess the impact of the changes on survivors of torture and trafficking despite the “long standing, consistent evidence of the serious risks of harm” faced by them.
Trafficking and torture survivors who come to the UK to seek protection have fled some of the worst forms of human cruelty. They are often traumatised, isolated and have an increased risk of being exploited. A sense of safety and security is incredibly important for them to recover from their trauma and rebuild their sense of self. As the Court highlighted, the government has long recognised that “survivors of torture, trafficking and other serious violence in treatment with FfT or HBF should not be required to share rooms with unrelated adults because of the recognised risk of serious harm, including re-traumatisation and increased self-harm and suicidal ideation”.
Since 2019, the Home Office has been placing people seeking asylum in ‘prison-like’ ex-military sites or in overcrowded hotels where they are forced to share rooms with strangers. These conditions often remind them of their past experiences of abuse and can be re-traumatising.
Prior to February 2024, there was a protective presumption that survivors of torture, trafficking or other forms of serious physical, psychological or sexual violence and those with disabilities should not be forced to share rooms. Then, suddenly and without warning, despite years of engaging with human rights experts over policies that affect highly vulnerable individuals, the Home Office fundamentally changed the ‘Allocation of Asylum Accommodation’ policy and “drastically dismantled the established protections for torture survivors.”
The Home Office made these changes without giving HBF or FfT, described by the Judge as “respected and expert bodies”, any advance notice or opportunity to consult, “suddenly abandoning an established practice of consultation that had governed their relationship for over two decades.”
The Court found that the government did not assess the impact of removing the protective presumption against room-sharing for survivors. It did not assess “the clinical risks of leaving vulnerable people in shared rooms during the “wait and see” period while their new suitability evidence was being gathered and evaluated, nor did it assess the practical, legal, and health barriers disabled asylum seekers face when trying to obtain such evidence.” In practice, the changes meant that many survivors were trapped in unsuitable living conditions and required legal representation to be moved.
Kamena Dorling, Director of Policy at the Helen Bamber Foundation, said:
“We have repeatedly raised concerns about terrible living conditions impeding the recovery of survivors of torture and trafficking. We have highlighted the shocking increase in self-harm and suicidal ideation in asylum accommodation.
“The decision to force more vulnerable people into large accommodation sites and shared hotel rooms was a political choice that ignored the evidence from those working with refugees every day.
“This legal battle was about making sure survivors are never an afterthought in the policies that shape their lives. It is time now for a different, more humane, approach.”
Natasha Tsangarides, Associate Director of Advocacy at Freedom from Torture, said:
"No matter who we are or where we come from, we all deserve to live in safety. Today’s judgment is a vital and resounding victory for torture survivors, who for too long have suffered under this harmful policy.
“The judgment makes clear that the government acted unlawfully in changing its policy. We have seen the consequences of those changes: survivors of torture have been placed in harm’s way. This must serve as a wake-up call for the government to listen to the experts and finally provide safe and secure housing once and for all.”
Thanks to our outstanding legal team, including Megan Smith at Deighton Pierce Glynn Solicitors, Shu Shin Luh of Doughty Street Chambers and Olivia Beach of 1 Pump Court Chambers.