This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41567761

The article has changed 8 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 2 Version 3
Torture survivors win asylum seeker detention ruling Torture survivors win asylum seeker detention ruling
(35 minutes later)
Survivors of torture have won a legal challenge against Home Office rules on asylum seeker detention in the UK.Survivors of torture have won a legal challenge against Home Office rules on asylum seeker detention in the UK.
The government had argued torture could only be carried out by official state agents or terror groups with territory.The government had argued torture could only be carried out by official state agents or terror groups with territory.
But the charity Medical Justice and former immigration centre detainees argued this legal definition was too narrow.But the charity Medical Justice and former immigration centre detainees argued this legal definition was too narrow.
The Home Office has said it will not appeal against the ruling, which could affect hundreds of cases.The Home Office has said it will not appeal against the ruling, which could affect hundreds of cases.
The ruling followed accusations that individuals were locked up during the processing of their asylum claims, despite doctors submitting evidence of torture and ill-treatment to the Home Office.The ruling followed accusations that individuals were locked up during the processing of their asylum claims, despite doctors submitting evidence of torture and ill-treatment to the Home Office.
Mr Justice Ouseley ruled that Home Office policy on torture survivors "lacked a rational or evidence basis".Mr Justice Ouseley ruled that Home Office policy on torture survivors "lacked a rational or evidence basis".
Two-tier system 'leaves refugees destitute'Two-tier system 'leaves refugees destitute'
Medical Justice accused the government of adopting an unreasonably narrow definition of torture in policy changes made last September related to Article 1 of the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment or Punishment (Uncat). 'Turn a blind eye'
The legal challenge argued that the new definition - which was made last September and has been on hold pending the judge's ruling - had led to "many" detainees, including victims of trafficking, no longer being recognised as victims of torture.The legal challenge argued that the new definition - which was made last September and has been on hold pending the judge's ruling - had led to "many" detainees, including victims of trafficking, no longer being recognised as victims of torture.
Their lawyer argued at a hearing earlier this year that there was no "lawful authorisation" for replacing the broader meaning of torture under the Detention Centre Rules 2001, and that the change did not comply with the government's public sector equality duty under the Equality Act 2010. Seven people who had sought sanctuary in Britain after being raped, abused or trafficked were among those detained under the new policy because they were not classed as torture victims.
But the High Court said the Home Office had acted unlawfully, because the new rules excluded people who were vulnerable to harm in detention.
Mr Po, one of the former detainees who was part of the legal challenge, welcomed the decision.
He said: "The policy allowed the Home Office to turn a blind eye to my suffering and the suffering of hundreds of other torture survivors.
"Although I welcome the decision, it is still upsetting that the Home Office, who should protect people like me, rejected me and put me in detention which reminded me of the ordeal I suffered in my country of origin."