The “Chancellor’s foot” and the contrivance of deportability in the UK: matters arising

• Published in: International journal of law and management Vol. 60; no. 6; pp. 1539 - 1562
• Main Author: Ikegwuruka, Cosmas
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Patrington Emerald Publishing Limited 12.11.2018; Emerald Group Publishing Limited
• Subjects: Conformity; Criminal law; Criminalization; Deportation; Human rights; Immigration policy; International law; Law; Migration; Noncitizens; Principles; Rule of law; Sovereignty; United Kingdom > UK; Nigeria; Bangladesh; Removal; Deportation; Crimmigration; Legitimate expectation; Liberal democracy
• ISSN: 1754-243X; 1754-2448
• DOI: 10.1108/IJLMA-09-2017-0216

Purpose It has been argued that the UK has the reputation of operating a complex set of immigration laws to the extent that the constantly changing laws and regulations lead much to confusion and lack of accountability. It has further been argued that the ever-increasing and shifting pattern of deportation laws (some of which are retroactive) violates the basic principles of human rights norms. This paper aims to raise the query as to whether legislation associated with deportation is constantly enacted and revised to achieve deportation without regard to the remit of the doctrine of legitimate expectation encapsulated under the principle of legal certainty. Design/methodology/approach This research applies the doctrinal research methodology in addition to somewhat reliance on anecdotal evidence. Doctrinal research is library-based and reliance will be placed on primary and secondary materials such as legislations, case laws, soft laws on the one hand and textbooks, journals, articles, legal encyclopaedia, databases and many valuable websites on the other hand. Findings While it is accepted that the State enjoys the discretion or prerogative to deport migrants that violate the State’s immigration laws, the author posits that the issue of constant changes breed uncertainty, which in turn breeds unpredictability leading to unaccountability. Drawing on the UK’s state practice, the author will submit that contrivance of deportability and/or removability is adumbrated by the legal production of migrant irregularity exemplified by inconsistent and uncertain laws that vary like the “Chancellor’s foot”. In addition, the research found that crimmigration heightened the velocity of deportation by expanding deportability grounds by way of triggering broader, harsher and more frequent criminal consequences leading to conviction, thereby creating a suitable avenue for deportation and reducing the scope for challenging deportation decisions. Originality/value The research is an original piece of work that contributes to scholarship and knowledge in the area of migration as it concerns international human rights law given that wider matters within the boundaries of immigration and nationality laws do have effect on individual possession of rights to be in the UK, by way of lawful presence or as a matter of discretion.