Published:  25th May 2026

The Government has proposed creating a new Independent Appeals Body (IAB) to hear asylum appeals, as part of wider reforms to speed up decision-making and reduce backlogs in the system.

In May 2026, the Public Law Project (PLP) submitted evidence in response, raising serious concerns about the independence of the new body and the assumptions behind them. 

Read the evidence here

Summary

PLP argues that the IAB risks undermining fairness, independence, and the quality of decision-making in asylum appeals. In particular, the proposals would move away from the current specialist tribunal system, where legally qualified judges are appointed through an independent process, towards a model that could include decision-makers without legal training, such as civil servants or local authority figures. We are concerned that this would significantly weaken judicial independence in cases that are often complex and life-changing.

The response also highlights wider pressures in the asylum and immigration system that the proposals do not address. Many people already face hearings without legal representation due to the ongoing crisis in immigration legal aid, and we warn that increasing reliance on remote or paper-based hearings could further disadvantage those most in need of support.

Instead of introducing a new appeals body, PLP calls for a more joined-up, system-wide approach to reform. This would include improving the quality of initial Home Office decisions, expanding access to early legal advice, and strengthening capacity across all the essential elements of the system — including legal aid providers, interpreters, expert witnesses, the Home Office and the courts. Evidence shows that a significant proportion of asylum decisions are overturned on appeal, suggesting that improving initial decision-making and legal support would be a more effective way to reduce delays and backlogs than redesigning the appeals structure itself.