A provision in the Home Secretary's Nationality and Borders Bill states that officials would "not be liable any criminal or civil proceedings for anything done" while they are turning small boats around that are carrying refugees seeking asylum in the UK.

Border Force staff are currently being trained to employ "turn-around" tactics at sea that would force small boats back into French waters.

The proposals of the tactics – also included in the bill – have been rejected by the French government with the interior minister, Gérald Darmanin saying that "safeguarding human lives at sea takes priority over considerations of nationality, status and migratory policy”.

READ MORE: Tories deliberately target the most vulnerable with anti-refugee bill

The Borders Bill is currently at the committee stage where it is examined line-by-line and gives an opportunity for changes to be made to the wording or for new clauses to be added.

The Tory government is seeking to stem the rise in the number of migrants entering the UK via small boats with more than 17,000 already having made the crossing this year - double the number in 2020.

Should the bill pass into law, anyone entering the UK via an illegal route such as by a small boat crossing, could have their claim for asylum rejected and even receive a jail sentence as well as having no recourse to public funds and have family members barred from joining them.

The provision in the Nationality and Borders Bill states: “A relevant officer is not liable in any criminal or civil proceedings for anything done in the purported performance of functions under this part of this schedule if the court is satisfied that (a) the act was done in good faith, and (b) there were reasonable grounds for doing it.”

Migrant Voice, an organisation seeking to empower migrants to speak out, said it is "extremely concerned" about the proposal, adding: "This, alongside many other parts of the [Borders Bill], is dangerous and wrong."

However, the provision is not guaranteed to protect staff from prosecution under maritime or domestic laws, according to immigration barrister Colin Yeo.

“There are two qualifiers in the provision and it is hard to see how it could be reasonable to leave someone to either drown at sea or in a small boat which doesn’t have enough fuel to reach land,” Yeo told the Guardian.

The UN Convention on the law of the sea says that nations are required to give assistance to "any person found at sea in danger of being lost” and “proceed with all possible speed to the rescue of persons in distress”.

READ MORE: SNP members resoundingly reject 'regressive' Tory Borders Bill

Home Office sources have indicated that they are seeking to protect Border Force guards from prosecution.

A Home Office spokesperson said: “As part of our ongoing response to these dangerous crossings, we continue to evaluate and test a range of safe and legal options for stopping small boats.

“All operational procedures used at sea comply and are delivered in accordance with domestic and international law.

“We will fix the broken asylum system through our new plan for immigration, break the business model of people smugglers who put lives at risk and welcome people through safe and legal route.”

Borders Bill is 'biggest assault on UK refugees ever'

Earlier this week, a report from a group of leading immigration lawyers said Patel's bill breaches domestic law as well as being the "biggest legal assault on international refugee law ever seen in the UK".

Led by human rights QC Raza Husain, the report was commissioned by the Freedom From Torture group concluded that the Borders Bill penalises "both criminally and administratively" those who arrive to the UK via irregular means to seek asylum.

The report also stated that the bill reverses "a number of important decisions of the UK courts, including at the House of Lords and court of appeal level, given over the last 20 years".

Adding to this, it is also potentially in breach of the UN Refugee Convention, specifically articles 31 and 33.

Article 31 states that countries cannot expel a refugee for arriving by irregular means if they are coming from "a territory where their life or freedom was threatened" provided these people present themselves to authorities and show good cause for entering via illegal means. I also states that nations will not apply restrictions to the movements of refugees other than "those which are necessary" until their status is confirmed or they gain admission into another country.

Article 33 concerns returning refugees to the area from which they are fleeing and states that this should not happen where the person's life would be threatened on account of their "race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion".

These articles can be contravened where there are "reasonable grounds" that the refugee is a "danger to the security of the country" or has been convicted of a serious crime which would constitute a threat to the community of the country.

The SNP have previously described the Borders Bill as "regressive" and said that the Tories have shown "zero compassion" through their support of it.

The party's immigration spokesperson at Westminster Anne McLaughlin (above) has described the Borders Bill as a "full-frontal assault" on the UN Refugee Convention.

She said:  “There has rightly been widespread condemnation from MPs and charities about this bill but the Tories continue to bury their head in the sand and plough ahead with legislation that breaches the UK’s international obligations. Indeed, it is a full-frontal assault on the Refugee Convention.

"The Home Secretary must now listen to the concerns raised by parties and charities alike and immediately U-turn on implementing this Bill.

“Scotland has shown it wants to take a different path - one that is open and welcoming and plays its part on the world stage. That will only be achieved with the full powers of independence.”