Channel migration: Border boat staff don't need immunity from prosecution, says union

Border force staff do not need immunity from prosecution if a refugee crossing the Channel dies, their union has said.

Home Secretary Priti Patel is reported to be considering such a move to give legal protection to staff ordered to "push back" migrant boats.

But the ISU union said seafaring staff already complied with international laws on the protection of life.

They acted ethically because it was the right thing to do - not out of fear of prosecution, the union added.

Last month, officials were authorised to use the so-called "pushback" tactic, if personally approved by Ms Patel.

More than 12,600 migrants have made the journey across the English Channel so far this year.

Ms Patel has vowed to crack down on organised crime gangs who smuggle people to the UK for profit - and said the new Nationality and Borders Bill will seek to "break their business model".

In September, the Home Office confirmed border officials will have the authority to turn boats away in limited circumstances and only with the prior approval of the home secretary.

It has sparked fears that border officials could be subject to prosecution if a migrant drowns.

The government has not yet published all the details of the Bill, although it does outline maritime enforcement measures to make "pushbacks" easier.

But critics have cast doubt on whether the new powers would ever be used in practice because Border Force commanders, like everyone else at sea, are under an international legal obligation to protect life where possible.

Lucy Moreton, of the ISU union, said Border Force staff would not "recklessly or deliberately endanger life" if they did not have immunity from prosecution.

"Ms Patel's approach appears to suggest that she believes staff are only held back out of fear of prosecution for any loss of life. That is simply not the case."

In addition, UK law could not "protect an officer from prosecution in another jurisdiction, for example in France or internationally", they added.

"Such a measure would likely be subject to significant and lengthy legal challenge. Immunity could not, for example, be infinite.

"There will inevitably, and correctly, be challenges to the extent of an officer's actions should a death result."

Minnie Rahman, interim chief executive of the the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants, said pushing small boats back is "extremely dangerous" and "similar tactics have been linked to hundreds of deaths in the Mediterranean".

"Once again it seems that government is intent on using refugees as a political football, instead of taking the practical steps needed to end dangerous crossings for good, by working with the French and establishing safe, regulated means of travel for people seeking asylum in the UK", she added.

Labour is still waiting to see the full proposals but Shadow Home Secretary, Nick Thomas-Symonds, said: "The Conservatives do not respect the rule of law. These provisions would be unconscionable".

In a statement, the Home Office said: "We are seeing an unacceptable rise in dangerous Channel crossings and as part of our ongoing operational response, we continue to evaluate and test a range of safe and legal options for stopping small boats.

"The health, safety and wellbeing of our staff is paramount when undertaking all of their operational duties."

"That's why we provide extensive training and provide operational procedures that comply and are delivered in accordance with domestic and international law."

The statement said officials are continuing to work with trade unions representing border staff about the way ahead and that people should claim asylum in the first safe country they reach, rather than attempting dangerous crossings to get to the UK

It said staff already have the power to intercept boats where "facilitation is suspected in UK waters" and that all operational procedures used at sea comply with domestic and international law.

The Nationality and Borders Bill is progressing through the House of Commons and will be examined in committee again next week.