Further evidence submitted by the Honourable
Mr Justice Collins, former President, Immigration Appeal Tribunal
in response to additional questions from the Committee (AIA 43A)
Is there any justification for expressly removing
immigration cases from the jurisdiction of the Appellate Committee
of the House of Lords, and could this lead to the situation that
there would be no authoritative interpretation of treaty and convention
obligations if the Court of Appeal were to be restricted to an
error correcting role?
I see no conceivable justification for this.
Since only cases raising points of real importance can be certified
by the President so as to go to the Court of Appeal, it is difficult
to understand the reason why they cannot go further. There are
a number of authoritative decisions of the House of Lords and,
as asylum is international, it is surely essential that our highest
court should be giving the really important decisions.
Do you think that the appeals system will leave
to much power in the hands of the President of the new tribunal?
There is certainly a danger that this will be
so. However fair minded the President may be, there is always
a temptation in the belief that one is right not to let the Court
of Appeal interfere.
Sir Andrew Collins
| 
