Challenging Asylum and Immigration Tribunal Decisions in Scotland: An Evaluation of Onward Appeals and Reconsiderations

Citation

Craig S, Fletcher M & Goodall K (2008) Challenging Asylum and Immigration Tribunal Decisions in Scotland: An Evaluation of Onward Appeals and Reconsiderations. The Nuffield Foundation. University of Glasgow and University of Stirling. http://hdl.handle.net/1905/763

Abstract
Two questions remain central to the debate about decision making in immigration and asylum: the first is how to improve the quality of decisions reached and, in asylum cases concerns about quality often focus on the issue of credibility assessment. The second concern is how much scope there should be to challenge decisions, and in particular the length of time it takes to conclude cases. Efforts have been made to reduce delay in concluding appeals partly to ensure that administrators can "keep up", and are able to process cases as they arrive, and partly because of the presumption that delay in concluding appeals benefits appellants who can remain in the UK while their appeals are being processed. The range of decisions which can be appealed against has been reduced, in part in response to this concern. However, in reality, delay also disadvantages the appellant who is abroad and wants to enter the UK, and for appellants in the UK, distress, mental health problems and even suicide have been linked with the protracted delays experienced in the asylum appeals process. The question of how to reconcile quality with prompt decision-making therefore remains central to but controversial in immigration and asylum decision-making.