Eritrean migrant set for deportation under 'one-in, one-out' scheme after High Court ruling

A Eritrean man is set to be deported to France tomorrow after losing a High Court bid to block removal under the government’s 'one-in, one-out' scheme. His removal from the United Kingdom is scheduled for about 6:15 a.m. on Friday, following his arrival in the UK on a small boat last month and a legal challenge filed against the Home Office the preceding Thursday.

At a London hearing, his barristers sought interim relief on the grounds that the decision to deport him was procedurally unfair because he had not been given a sufficient opportunity to present evidence that he was an alleged trafficking victim. The Home Office opposed the bid, arguing that there was no serious issue to be tried. In a ruling, Mr Justice Sheldon refused the application, stating that the test for injunctive relief was not met and that there was no serious issue to be tried in the case. The man has told of a difficult journey: he says he was forced to flee Eritrea in 2019 because of conscription and spent time in Ethiopia, South Sudan and Libya before travelling to France, where he stayed in Paris for about a week. He described himself as homeless and destitute, and he said he constantly feared for his life. He then went to Dunkirk, staying in an encampment known as “the Jungle” for around three weeks without making an asylum claim in France.

The man arrived in the UK via a small boat in August and was detained by the UK Border Force on August 6, with his asylum claim deemed inadmissible on August 9, according to the judge’s recounting of the proceedings. He is the latest in a series of cases involving Eritrean nationals under the government’s framework, which pairs departures with removals to other countries.

The ruling follows a separate Eritrean case on Tuesday in which another individual successfully sought a temporary block on removal after the judge found there was a serious issue to be tried over trafficking claims. In that instance, the court heard that the national referral mechanism (NRM), which identifies and assesses victims of slavery and human trafficking, had found that the man was unlikely to have been trafficked but allowed more time for representations. The Home Office subsequently revised its policy on reconsidering modern slavery decisions, so that anyone being removed to a safe country who wishes to appeal an NRM decision would be unable to do so in the United Kingdom; instead they could launch a legal challenge from another country, such as France.

Officials described the changes as a procedural adjustment in response to ongoing cases, while noting that removal decisions remain subject to legal challenge where appropriate. This is a developing situation, and authorities said more updates would follow as the cases progress.

The unfolding events underscore the complexity of asylum and trafficking determinations amid an evolving policy landscape in the United Kingdom, where court rulings continue to shape how and where legal challenges can be pursued after deportation decisions are made. The two Eritrean cases illustrate the tension between urgent removal timelines and the rights of individuals to present evidence in support of trafficking or other protective claims.