In a move that has drawn widespread condemnation, the UK government plans to immediately begin seizing asylum seekers’ mobile phones and SIM cards without the need for an arrest at the Manston Immigration Processing Centre in Kent. Starting Monday, people who arrive by small boat and are sent to the processing centre will be eligible for searches of their electronic devices, with technology on site to download data.
Officials will be allowed to search inside the mouths of detainees for hidden technology, though they have so far declined to confirm whether children will also be subjected to these invasive procedures. The plans have been criticised by a solicitor and an anti-torture campaigner as “profoundly inhumane” and a “shocking disregard for the fundamental right to privacy.”
Natasha Tsangarides, an associate director at the NGO Freedom from Torture, said: “Subjecting desperate and traumatised men, women and children to invasive searches – including examinations of their clothing and even inside their mouths – immediately after they have survived a terrifying Channel crossing is profoundly inhumane.”
Jonah Mendelsohn, a solicitor whose firm represents dozens of asylum claimants, has questioned whether the government’s plans will comply with a 2022 high court ruling on mobile phone seizure. He said the use of intrusive searches and data extraction requires independent authorisation and oversight, which is not clear in the proposed legislation.
The move comes as the government attempts to clamp down on unauthorised immigration across the Channel, with Labour leader Keir Starmer vowing to see “evidence” of asylum hotel closures in the coming months. It is part of the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Act that became law in December.
Border Minister Alex Norris said the new powers will help “intercept, disrupt and dismantle these vile gangs faster than ever before and cut off their supply chains.” However, critics argue that treating all refugees as a security threat, regardless of evidence, shows a “shocking disregard for the fundamental right to privacy.”
