ASYLUM seekers could be required to wear electronic tracking tags under a proposal put forward by a senior policing officer, sparking concern within the Home Office over legality and human rights.
Katy Bourne, the Conservative police and crime commissioner for Sussex, has urged the government to test the idea through a pilot scheme, reported the Telegraph.
She said electronic monitoring could help deter crime, assist police investigations and allow asylum seekers more freedom of movement while they await decisions on their claims.
The proposal comes as the government prepares to move around 540 asylum seekers into the former Crowborough Army training camp in East Sussex, with the first arrivals expected early in the new year. The plan has raised worries among local residents.
Speaking to broadcasters, Bourne said the large number of people waiting for asylum decisions meant the risk of crime, either as victims or offenders, was unavoidable.
She said police often struggled to trace individuals who had “very little official ID or digital footprint” in the UK.
She argued that electronic tags could also help migrants travel further from accommodation sites and take up temporary work. “If someone refused to wear a tag,” she said, “that could indicate an intention to abscond or to engage in unlawful activity.”
According to Bourne, a new tagging scheme in Sussex for repeat shoplifters, where offenders are monitored around the clock and banned from entering certain streets, towns or shops. Early results, she said, were “promising”, with police seeing changes in behaviour.
She called on the home secretary to be “bold” and trial tagging at Crowborough, adding: “You might end up being thanked by taxpayers, the police and the migrants themselves.”
The Home Office said it already had powers to tag foreign offenders and people facing deportation under the Immigration Act 2016. However, extending tagging to all asylum seekers could be unlawful, impractical and a breach of human rights.
A spokesperson said the government planned to close asylum hotels and move people into “more suitable accommodation”, including military sites, while maintaining strict security and identity checks.
Migration charity Ramfel criticised the idea, calling it “cruel and punitive” for people who had not committed crimes. The group said giving asylum seekers the right to work would save public money and reduce reliance on hotels and barracks.
