Woman suffered miscarriage ‘after stress’ of conditions at Manston migrant detention centre

Exclusive: Judge grants permission for High Court hearing into need for public inquiry over overcrowding crisis at Manston

A pregnant mother suffered a miscarriage after she was separated from her husband and left to look after her five children in “deplorable” conditions at Manston detention centre, the High Court has heard.

Details of the harrowing case were revealed as part of an application for a judicial review into the home secretary’s refusal to have an inquiry into the overcrowding at the short-term holding facility for asylum seekers. Some 10,600 individuals passed through the Kent detention centre between October and December 2022, the court heard.

The former military base was emptied at the end of November last year after it was revealed there was severe overcrowding at the site, with migrants sleeping on cardboard and one man dying of diphtheria. It is now back in use and will reportedly be part of plans to detain thousands of small boat migrants under the Illegal Migration Act.

Sixteen claimants who were held at the site have brought legal action against the home secretary, arguing that there should be an inquiry into the “deplorable conditions and mistreatment suffered by thousands of detainees”.

Mr Justice Eyre gave permission on Tuesday for a full hearing to go ahead next spring into whether the government should be forced to carry out a public inquiry into the failings at Manston.

A Manston migrant attempting to communicate with journalists is pinned against a fence by members of staff, before being taken out of view (PA)

Representing the claimants, Laura Dubinsky KC told the court that an inquiry would investigate allegations of violence, gross overcrowding, spread of infectious disease and severe understaffing. She said an inquiry would be able to compel witnesses to testify and would ensure access to vital documents.

Detailing the abuse suffered by migrants at Manston, she highlighted one case of a migrant who presented to the medical team with symptoms of diphtheria, was given paracetamol and was then sent back into his crowded marquee.

Angus McCullough KC also highlighted the story of one family where the father was separated at Manston from his pregnant wife and five children “apparently punitively”. The mother was left to look after the children by herself and she went on to “suffer a miscarriage, which she attributes to the acute stress”, the court heard.

The claimants argued that there are “credible allegations of racist abuse and violent assault by guards against detainees; of transmission of serious infectious diseases; and that the unfolding crisis and illegality at Manston were known and sanctioned or at least tolerated at the highest level”.

Unaccompanied children as young as 14 were held at the site, and the longest someone was detained was 31 days, the court heard.

On behalf of the Home Office, Neil Sheldon KC argued that an inquiry was not needed because an investigation had already been started by the independent chief inspector of borders and immigration.

In an unusual move, the then home secretary Suella Braverman decided in August this year to not renew the term of the chief inspector, who will leave his post next March. The court heard that the process to recruit a new inspector began only at the end of November and, according to internal Home Office advice, would likely take nine months to two years to complete.

As a result, concerns were raised by the claimants about how this investigation could be effective if there was no one to run it. Home Office lawyers told the court that if the role is not filled by next March “the alternative is not to leave the seat vacant, the alternative is likely to be the pro tem extension of his position”.

Mr Sheldon added that there was “no reason to anticipate an interregnum where everyone wonders what they are meant to be doing because there is no ICIBI [chief inspector]”.

David Neal, the current chief inspector, had committed to a “smooth transition” in his submissions to the court, and it was argued that this meant he would be minded to stay in the position if needed.

Sheroy Zaq, public law solicitor at Duncan Lewis which represented six of the claimants, said: “The result is an important step towards accountability and justice over the appalling events at Manston in late 2022. The claimants seek a thorough and effective investigation which ensures, among other objectives, that those responsible are identified and held to account, lessons are learnt and any recurrence is prevented.”

Jed Pennington, partner at Wilson Solicitor which is representing 10 of the claimants, said: “Our clients welcome the court’s decision but lament the delays in affording them the opportunity to seek answers for what they went through. The home secretary should now do the decent thing and establish an inquiry on a proper footing with the powers it needs to get to the truth of what happened at Manston in 2022.”