.jpg){kind=link}
Law Society raises concerns over review of refugee status after 30 months.
The Law Society of England and Wales has warned that plans to make refugee status temporary could place the UK in tension with its obligations under the 1951 Refugee Convention.
From Monday, all individuals applying for asylum in the UK will be told that their refugee status is temporary. The policy, announced by Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood, will require recognised refugees to have their status reviewed after 30 months.
Under the new approach, refugees will need to renew their permission to stay or apply for an alternative visa route in the same way as other authorised migrants. This will include paying associated application fees. The policy is modelled on Denmark’s asylum system.
The Law Society said the move creates prolonged uncertainty for people who have already been recognised by the government as requiring protection.
Its president, Mark Evans, said the changes stand “in tension” with Article 34 of the Refugee Convention, under which the UK agreed to facilitate the assimilation and naturalisation of refugees.
Article 34 states that contracting states shall, as far as possible, facilitate the assimilation and naturalisation of refugees and make every effort to expedite naturalisation proceedings while reducing associated charges and costs.
The UK signed the convention in 1951 and remains bound by its provisions.
The government has indicated that the policy forms part of a broader set of measures intended to deter people from travelling to the UK to claim asylum. Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s administration is preparing to introduce further measures described as hardline, aimed at reducing irregular migration.
Mahmood has faced criticism from some MPs, peers and affiliated unions for advancing the changes following Labour’s third-place finish in the Gorton and Denton byelection.
Organisations working with refugees have also raised concerns. Sophie McCann, forced displacement and protection advocacy adviser at Médecins Sans Frontières UK, described the decision as harmful to people who have fled conflict, violence and persecution.
She said embedding prolonged uncertainty within the asylum system could create psychological harm and affect refugees’ ability to recover from trauma and rebuild their lives.
Natasha Tsangarides, associate director at Freedom from Torture, said the policy would affect men, women and children who have been recognised as needing protection from torture and war. She argued that refugee status should represent a gateway to rebuilding life, rather than a temporary reprieve subject to repeated review.
The Home Office rejected suggestions that the approach breaches international law. A spokesperson said the UK would continue to provide sanctuary to those fleeing war and persecution, while ensuring the asylum system does not create “pull factors” encouraging dangerous journeys.
The spokesperson added that the government’s approach remains in line with international obligations and is designed to encourage individuals to build lives in the UK through safe and legal routes.
The debate centres on whether time-limited refugee status aligns with the spirit and wording of Article 34 of the convention. While the convention does not explicitly prohibit temporary status, critics argue that repeated reviews and associated fees may undermine commitments to facilitate integration and naturalisation.
The policy is due to take effect immediately for new asylum applicants. Its practical operation, including how reviews will be conducted and the criteria applied, is expected to become clearer as further details are published.
The Law Society’s intervention highlights ongoing legal scrutiny of the government’s asylum reforms and signals the potential for continued debate over the compatibility of domestic immigration policy with international refugee law.