# Challenges and concerns

There have been a number of concerns\[1] about the decision to divide decision-making about the NRM and to have a separate organisation, the IECA, with dual responsibility for immigration enforcement and removal, whilst also making life changing decisions about recognising victims of trafficking and modern slavery. This was seen as a conflict of interest, creating a discriminatory two-tier system with less protection for those without a secure immigration status and likely to result in victims being less willing to come forward and seek help. This change fails to take into account the relationship between having an insecure immigration status and being a victim of modern slavery.&#x20;

The IECA was subject to an inspection by the Independent Chief Inspector of Borders and Immigration in January – June 2024, [published](https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/67586ee0f8e28262d63bfa7d/An_inspection_of_the_Immigration_Enforcement_Competent_Authority__January___June_2024_.pdf) in December 2024. This found systemic organisational flaws, with issues with training, advice, guidance, evidence-gathering and poor decision-making. The IECA was judged to take insufficient account of the potential impact on individuals of poor-quality decisions and with underdeveloped thinking and resourcing for safeguarding issues.

A further area for concern is the application of AAR to victims of trafficking and modern slavery. It is particularly difficult for survivors to assemble the levels of evidence needed for the policy to be effective and operate to ensure their release. Instead the policy encourages a practice of waiting to see people deteriorate so that this can be documented, causing further avoidable harm.\[2] In the meantime people identified as potential victims of trafficking and modern slavery can be routinely kept in detention during their period of recovery and so cannot benefit from this period, since detention and the fear associated with that environment can be a triggering reminder of their experiences. Moreover, detention is a place which inhibits disclosure of a person’s traumatic history which then in turn reduces people’s ability to provide the evidence for final decisions about their trafficking status.\[3]

***

\[1] Report dated November 2021 of Detention Taskforce, an organisation which included AVID and detention stakeholders: Helen Bamber Foundation (Chair) Focus on Labour Exploitation (FLEX) (coordinating organisation), Bail for Immigration Detainees, Anti-Slavery International, Latin American Women's Rights Service, Duncan Lewis Solicitors - Public Law, Medical Justice, Ashiana Sheffield, Jesuit Refugee Service UK, ECPAT UK, After Exploitation, Unseen UK

<https://labourexploitation.org/app/uploads/2021/11/Detention-Taskforce_-Response-to-the-Immigration-Enforcement-Competent-Authority-sigs.pdf>

\[2] [Report: Abuse by the System](https://www.helenbamber.org/sites/default/files/2022-10/ES_Abuse%20by%20the%20system_survivors%20of%20trafficking%20in%20immigration%20detention.pdf) of Helen Bamber Foundation, ATLEU, Focus on Labour Exploitation and Medical Justice (October 2022)

\[3] [Submission](https://labourexploitation.org/app/uploads/2023/01/Taskforce-on-Victims-of-Trafficking-in-Detention-for-JCHR-Inquiry-14.12.pdf) by the taskforce on victims of trafficking in immigration detention (December 2022)
