THE right to NHS treatment for immigrants caught up in the highly skilled visa row will come before a court today.
Access to public health treatment will come under the spotlight along with the right to rent and to work.
READ MORE: New figures ‘add to case’ for Scottish immigration powers
The matter concerns highly skilled migrants whose lives have been put on hold due to the use of controversial immigration rule 322.5, which allows for visa refusals due to bad character, criminal conduct or involvement in terrorism.
The clause has been invoked against people who have corrected errors on historical tax returns, with some then denied the chance to earn, hold a rental agreement or use the NHS as they fight their cases.
A Westminster debate heard how this has included women in the latter weeks of pregnancy, including an expectant mother from East Renfrewshire.
Lecturers, IT experts, accountants and architects are amongst those caught up in 322.5 chaos, which affects those from non-EU countries. Many of those involved come from Commonwealth nations including Pakistan and Nigeria and the immigration issue has been compared to that of the Windrush scandal.
Campaigners, including the group Highly Skilled UK, has held several protests at the Houses of Parliament and The National has reported on the Scots graduates told to quit the UK over accounting corrections.
Many of those refused permission to live here have now sought judicial reviews as they try to secure their futures.
Despite a Home Office review of around 2000 cases, Immigration Minister Caroline Nokes had stated that no individuals had been successful to date at judicial review, something The National revealed is incorrect and, in a letter to Home Affairs Select Committee chair Yvette Cooper last month, Nokes acknowledged that this was inaccurate.
Today barristers will ask the Court of Appeal in London to decide on interim relief for immigrants caught up in judicial review and Home Office proceedings who have been denied the right to work.
Ahead of the morning session, Paul Turner of legal firm Imperium Chambers said it aimed to address the “discrepancy between those who can continue with their lives and fund their representatives and existence in the UK” and those who cannot, adding: “This hearing potentially effects many hundreds, if not thousands, of applicants. We hope to put up a good fight.”
In her June 21 letter to Cooper, Nokes sought to provide “assurances about the Home Office’s handling of these cases” and said officials had 249 cases where tax records had been amended by “more than £10,000”.
She stated: “It is important that any applicants who may have made minor errors have not been inadvertently caught up in tackling this wider pattern of abuse.
“We are carefully reviewing any cases where the evidence is less clear-cut, to be sure that our refusal decisions were correct.
“We will provide more information on these cases in our final report.”
Highly Skilled UK said: “We believe taking away appeal rights, work rights, etc, under the Immigration Act 2014 is like a punishment.
“How can you prove or punish without the trial?
“Innocent until proven guilty, where are those British values?”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here