Asylum Processing Delays: A System in Need of Transparency and Change – Angela Sharma
Angela Sharma explores asylum processing delays, and argues that the UK’s asylum system is in need of urgent reform to ensure that it is fair, robust, and credible.
The asylum system plays a crucial role in offering protection to individuals fleeing persecution, war, and violence. However, the growing backlog of asylum applications, bureaucratic inefficiencies, and policy loopholes have resulted in significant delays in decision-making. One of the key concerns is the lack of publicly available data on the time taken between different stages of the asylum process, making it difficult to assess where bottlenecks occur.
There are three stages to this process: initial screening interview, substantive review and decision.
It has been a challenge to understand the extent of asylum delays is the absence of detailed government data. The Home Office does not routinely publish specific statistics on the time intervals between the initial screening interview, substantive interview, and final decision.
This lack of transparency makes it difficult to pinpoint the precise reasons behind delays and to develop targeted solutions for speeding up the process.
In December 2022, the UK asylum system faced significant delays, with approximately 68% of applicants (around 110,000 people) waiting more than six months for an initial decision.[1] The average waiting time for an initial decision has extended to between one and three years.
The Migration Observatory at the University of Oxford further noted that, by 2021, the average waiting time had exceeded 20 months, with the backlog reaching approximately 161,000 people by the end of 2022[2].
The House of Commons Library reported that, as of December 2022, 68% (approximately 110,000 people) of those awaiting an initial decision had been waiting for more than six months, indicating prolonged delays in the asylum process[3].
These sources collectively indicate that many asylum seekers experience extended waiting periods, with some cases extending up to three years before a final decision is reached.
We have seen that this prolonged waiting period not only impacts asylum seekers but also places significant strain on the immigration system, legal resources, and public services.
While it can take up to three years to come to an asylum decision, the Home Office place bail conditions placed on asylum seekers – many of whom drop from the requirement of reporting if this is continued for a prolonged period of time. I have had clients who stopped attending the police stations to report.
Asylum seekers often stop reporting and then when they are arrested, they retore their asylum claim and allowing them to extend their time in the UK.
Eventually, even if a claim is refused, the applicant can lodge an appeal (if eligible), further extending their stay.
If no appeal rights exist, the individual may still make further submissions, which can lead to reconsideration or a fresh claim which provides for the individual seeking asylum further time in the UK. There is no official limit to the number of times an asylum seeker can make further submissions or a fresh claim in the UK. Even there are set criteria, the Home Office still have to consider the fresh claim.
While awaiting a decision and if asylum has not been decided Asylum seekers can under Paragraph 360 of the Immigration Rules apply for permission to work after 12 months and work in a job on the shortage occupation list[4], provided the delay is not their fault.
The UK Home Office does not publish specific data on the number of asylum seekers granted permission to work.
However, we can take a guess looking at some data. In June 2023, approximately 91,000 asylum seekers had been waiting over a year for an initial decision on their claims, a significant increase from previous years[5]. While the exact number of asylum seekers granted permission to work remains undisclosed, the growing backlog suggests that an increasing number may become eligible to apply for work authorisation under these provisions.
The prolonged processing times of asylum applications in the UK not only impact asylum seekers but also create long-term legal complexities, particularly for families with children. Asylum seekers who have remained in the UK for an extended period—whether due to delays, appeals, or further submissions—may eventually gain additional rights under private life provisions.
A significant additional legal avenue becomes available for asylum seekers who have children in the UK whilst they wait for their asylum case to be decided leading to settlement (Indefinite Leave to Remain).
Should we than question their credibility of their initial asylum claim when they return to their home country from where they were seeking asylum from?
Delays in asylum processing have unintended legal consequences, including the ability of long-staying asylum seekers to secure legal status through private life provisions. The seven-year rule for children provides a legal pathway for families who have been in the UK for an extended period, allowing parents to apply for leave to remain once their child reaches the threshold.
While this rule is intended to protect children’s best interests, it also highlights systemic inefficiencies that result in prolonged cases, ultimately allowing individuals to shift from asylum claims to private life applications. Addressing these delays with more efficient processing, increased transparency, and clear decision-making timelines would reduce reliance on such alternative legal routes while ensuring fairness for both asylum seekers and the immigration system.
The UK’s asylum system, as it currently stands, is overwhelmed by delays, hampered by a lack of transparency, and vulnerable to unintended legal consequences.
The absence of publicly available, granular data on processing times between key stages of the asylum process prevents meaningful accountability and reform.
These delays not only undermine the credibility and efficiency of the system but also result in legal grey areas that allow prolonged stays. While these pathways serve important humanitarian and legal functions, their increased use reflects systemic shortcomings rather than intentional design.
If the asylum system is to be fair, robust, and credible, it requires urgent reform focused on transparency, data publication, and timely decision-making. Bottom of Form
[1] https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9737/
[2] migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk
[3] commonslibrary.parliament.uk
[4] https://www.gov.uk/guidance/immigration-rules
[5] https://news.sky.com/story/increasing-number-of-migrants-being-granted-work-permits-before-their-asylum-decisions-due-to-backlogs-13007688