New report by Jesuit Refugee Service UK highlights severe problems with the Detained Duty Advice Scheme
A new report from Jesuit Refugee Service (JRS) UK details how people held in immigration detention centres in the UK face severe and growing barriers to accessing vital legal advice and representation.
The 16-page report, Accessing legal advice in detention: becoming an impossibility, can be downloaded here.
Drawing on survey data and in-depth casework conducted between August 2024 and June 2025 in Harmondsworth and Colnbrook Immigration Removal Centres (IRCs), the report found that only 38% of respondents had any form of legal representation, and only 30% were represented through the Detained Duty Advice Scheme (DDAS) that is supposed to facilitate access to legal advice in detention. Those who had legal support outside the DDAS had obtained it privately.
Difficulty accessing legal advice in detention is part of a wider legal crisis in immigration and asylum, with the report highlighting: "Even in the community, it is very difficult, and often impossible, for people navigating the asylum or immigration systems to find a legal advisor, or for support organisations to refer service-users to legal advisors. This situation has developed from a successive, systematic reduction of legal aid over the past two decades, drastically reducing the number of providers. Over half of legal aid providers for immigration and asylum cases were lost between 2005 and 2018, with those that remain finding themselves severely over-stretched."
JRS UK says that most people in detention simply do not have meaningful access to any legal advice at all, adding that it has become commonplace to encounter individuals who have sought asylum in the UK and had their claims refused without ever speaking with a legal advisor.
The report details the struggle to access a legal advisor via the DDAS for those in immigration detention. Despite being entitled to this support, individuals often sign up to the DDAS and never hear back. Even when contact is made, lawyers frequently decline to take on the case, often citing a lack of capacity or limitations in the scope of legal aid funding. Some people must sign up multiple times or make repeated follow-up calls just to receive a response.
When consultations do take place, JRS UK says they are rarely adequate. Most happen over the phone rather than in person, which limits clarity and rapport. The situation is made worse by the frequent absence of interpreters, even when clearly needed. As a result, many individuals are left confused about the advice given or uncertain whether their case is being taken forward. Some do not even know the name of the legal firm or advisor they spoke with. In other cases, advisors only agree to handle narrow parts of a case, such as bail applications, while leaving more complex and pressing matters, such as asylum claims, unaddressed. Even where representation is provided, JRS UK documents numerous instances of poor-quality legal support, including failures to apply for bail when appropriate, lack of communication, or inaccurate presentation of a person's case.
The report warns of the dangers of having no legal representation, stating:
"The consequences of having to navigate the asylum and immigration system, and challenge one's detention, without legal advice, are profound. Key recurring issues are:
• People in detention are routinely missing appeal deadlines and being unrepresented at appeal hearings because they do not have any legal representation. Appeal forms are complicated and technical and therefore very difficult to fill out without legal expertise. • Notably, one is not permitted to assist someone to fill one out without being properly accredited as an immigration legal advisor.
Frequently, people are unrepresented at bail hearings, and have no idea of how best to approach them or any likely impact on their wider case.
• More broadly, people in detention face a huge struggle to resolve their cases and have them fairly adjudicated. They are trapped in a system which is impossible to navigate without specialist legal knowledge.
"All of this places people in danger of being removed without effective access to due process, and the checks and safeguards that the justice system is intended to provide. In the case of people navigating the asylum system, there is a risk of refoulement – of sending refugees back into danger, in contravention of the Refugee Convention. Additionally, it places people at risk of prolonged detention, which is deeply harmful. Detention is profoundly traumatic, a serious interference with a person's right to liberty, and does longterm damage to mental health. The British Medical Association has called for the abolition of immigration detention, noting that detention 'exacerbates vulnerability and causes deterioration in physical and mental health'."
JRS UK concludes its report with a series of urgent recommendations aimed at addressing the systemic barriers to legal advice in immigration detention. While JRS UK ultimately opposes the use of detention for immigration control, it says that so long as detention continues, immediate reforms are essential.
Key among the report's recommendations is that everyone held in immigration detention should automatically be allocated an initial appointment with a legal advisor under the DDAS, unless they actively opt out. The details of the appointment should be clearly communicated, with interpreters made available as needed. JRS UK also calls on the Legal Aid Agency to urgently review the quality of advice provided through the DDAS, removing firms that routinely refuse cases or deliver poor service, and to expand the scheme to ensure more cases can be taken on. The report calls for all immigration cases to fall within the scope of automatic legal aid, for legal providers to be funded to attend detention centres in person, and for further urgent action to be taken to address the wider legal aid crisis affecting immigration and asylum cases.