Although many academic studies have been concerned with the interaction of lawyers, witnesses and judges in the courtroom, there have been few attempts to examine the routine administrative work which takes place behind-the-scenes in maintaining any court-system. In this chapter, I want to examine the immigration courts mainly from the perspective of civil servants in the Home Office and Lord Chancellor’s Department during the period 1996-97, and look at the effect of changes made during this period on other organisations in the court-system. I will also be discussing the 1999 Immigration and Asylum Bill, which will have received its third reading in Parliament by the time this book is published.

I will begin by providing a general introduction to the perspective of the civil service in this area of government policy. I will then provide an account of some of the administrative work involved in making the 1996 Asylum and Immigration Act, and the new procedural rules that came into effect in September of that year. I will also examine the effect of these, and other changes that were taking place, on the work of managers and practitioners in the Immigration Advisory Service (IAS), a unit of Home Office Presenting Officers, and the Immigration Appellate Authority. I will then discuss developments after 1997, including the changes that will result from the 1999 Act, and conclude by considering the practical alternatives open to policy makers in managing the immigration courts.

The civil service perspective

When the immigration courts were set up by the 1969 Immigration (Appeals) Act, they were initially made the responsibility of the Immigration and Nationality Department in the Home Office. It has the task of making and implementing British policy on immigration and asylum, under the direction of ministers appointed through the political process.

During the 1970s, the Home Office was responsible for all aspects of the appeals process, as well as the initial work of making decisions on applications. It was directly responsible for training and managing the Presenting Officers who represented the government at appeals hearings. It also funded, and exercised ultimate administrative authority over both the United Kingdom Immigration Advisory Service (UKIAS), which provided free advice and assistance to appellants, and the Immigration Appellate Authority which ran the courts.