Taskiran v The Secretary of State for the Home Department

Immigration detention remains lawful where there is a realistic prospect of removal within a reasonable period, assessed flexibly and by reference to the facts known at the material time. The Hardial Singh principles require an intention to deport, detention for no longer than reasonable, release when removal within a reasonable period is no longer realistically possible, and reasonable diligence and expedition. Risk of absconding or reoffending is important but is not determinative. Under the European Union–Turkey Readmission Agreement, Turkey’s obligations to readmit qualifying persons are unqualified. Legal or factual obstacles may extend procedural time limits, but do not dilute those obligations. The application was dismissed because diplomatic progress, the EURA application and the anticipated resolution of outstanding appeal issues meant that removal remained realistically possible within a reasonable period.

The claimant, a Turkish-born foreign criminal who claimed to be stateless, challenged his continuing detention pending deportation. He had been detained from the end of a custodial sentence on 16 December 2016. Earlier attempts to remove him had failed because Turkey had withdrawn his nationality and had not issued travel documentation unless he agreed to undertake military service.

The Secretary of State relied on the European Union–Turkey Readmission Agreement and continuing diplomatic efforts to secure his readmission. The claimant argued that the EURA time limits had expired, that outstanding protection and appeal issues prevented removal, and that the Turkish authorities were not operating the agreement effectively. The central issues were whether EURA applied and whether removal remained realistically possible within a reasonable period for the purposes of the Hardial Singh principles.

1. The claim was dismissed. The court held that the claimant’s detention had not become unlawful because there remained a realistic prospect of removal within a reasonable period.
2. The court applied the four Hardial Singh principles: detention must be for the purpose of deportation; it must last no longer than reasonable; detention must end when removal within a reasonable period is no longer possible; and the Secretary of State must act with reasonable diligence and expedition. The assessment is flexible and multi-factorial. There are no fixed detention tariffs. Risk of absconding and risk of reoffending are relevant but do not determine the issue.
3. The European Union–Turkey Readmission Agreement applied. Although the primary time limit in article 11.1 had expired, the custodial sentence, the coming into force of EURA, disruption in Turkey and prolonged uncertainty over the application process constituted legal or factual obstacles to making an application earlier.
4. Articles 3.1 and 3.3 imposed unqualified obligations on Turkey to readmit qualifying persons. Legal or factual obstacles could extend procedural time limits under articles 3.5 and 11, but were matters for the requesting state and did not qualify Turkey’s readmission obligations. The Turkish authorities could not insist on a ‘no barriers’ letter as a condition of accepting an application.
5. At the date of detention, the Secretary of State knew of the claimant’s previous removability problems, but the emerging EURA route represented a material change. Thereafter, the Home Office and Foreign and Commonwealth Office had pursued the matter with sustained diligence. The Turkish authorities had not formally refused readmission, and their eventual agreement to interview the claimant indicated that the EURA process was being implemented.
6. The claimant’s successful appeal created a barrier to removal, but it was capable of being resolved relatively quickly and did not operate independently of the documentation issue. The court criticised the misleading ‘no barriers’ letter sent to the Turkish authorities, but held that the error did not make continued detention unlawful. Removal remained realistically possible within a reasonable period.