Nearly 200 asylum seekers have launched legal claims against the UK Home Office alleging they were unlawfully detained and mistreated at the Manston migrant holding centre in Kent, lawyers said. The group is seeking compensation and says their treatment breached Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which prohibits inhuman or degrading treatment.
The claims, brought by six legal firms on behalf of 194 people, allege a range of abuses and failings at Manston between June and November 2022, when the facility was holding about 4,000 people — roughly three times its official capacity. Among the allegations are physical assault and sexual assault, theft of property by guards, forcible separation of families, denial of medical assistance, and overcrowded, cold and unsanitary conditions, including spread of scabies and outbreaks of diphtheria.
Lawyers representing the claimants say people were held beyond the 24-hour limit set out in Home Office short-term holding rules and that some detainees were forced to sleep on floors with thin blankets, had little or no access to clean clothes, soap or hot water, and faced restricted access to telephones. One legal firm cited incidents including racist language, physical violence and punishment by locking people in vans; there were also allegations that some detainees tried to harm themselves.
Internal Home Office documents reported in media outlets warned that failings at the former Royal Air Force base could be "reputationally damaging". A briefing note is said to list a death in custody, unlawful detention of adults and children, and alleged misconduct by officials among the incidents under review. The newspaper reporting those documents said at least one death at Manston was linked to diphtheria.
The Home Office announced a public inquiry in February into events at Manston during the period in question. The inquiry is separate from litigation, and a department spokesman said it would be inappropriate to comment while the inquiry and related legal action were ongoing.
Under Home Office guidance, migrants unlawfully detained beyond the statutory 24-hour period can receive a standard award of about £500 for each 24-hour period of detention, with the potential for aggravated or exemplary damages in more serious cases. Lawyers for the claimants say the Home Office has been refusing to settle and is requiring claims to be pursued through the courts. A previous case in October found that a migrant unlawfully detained at an immigration removal centre for three months had been subjected to degrading or inhuman treatment and was awarded £203,995.
Among the firms representing the claimants is a solicitor group that successfully challenged the government’s bid to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda. The government’s policy to remove Channel migrants to Rwanda was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2022 after legal challenges.
Several former senior ministers who served in Conservative governments during 2022 may be asked to give evidence to the inquiry, including former prime ministers and former home secretaries, according to reporting. The ministry’s handling of large numbers of Channel crossings and the decision to use Manston as a short-term processing facility have been central to scrutiny of the department’s approach last year.
Manston is currently used for short-term holding, and Defence Secretary Luke Pollard has said the site may be expanded to accommodate asylum seekers being moved from hotels. The claims and the inquiry follow intense political and public scrutiny over the Home Office’s management of arrivals and temporary accommodation, and come as the department faces separate legal and reputational challenges arising from its handling of migration.
The inquiry and court cases are expected to explore whether department officials were warned that people were being detained for unlawfully long periods and whether systemic failures led to breaches of safeguarding duties and regulatory rules governing short-term holding facilities. The Home Office has declined further comment pending the inquiry and ongoing litigation.