France urged to suspend the one-in, one-out treaty with UK

(FRANCE/UNITED KINGDOM) Human rights groups are urging France to suspend the “one in, one out” treaty with the United Kingdom, arguing the France–UK policy risks undermining asylum rights and basic due process for people seeking protection across the Channel.

The treaty—ratified in July 2025 and operational since August 2025—lets the UK return up to 50 migrants per week who entered illegally from France, while the UK accepts an equal number of people from France who enter legally under strict documentation rules. Advocates say the arrangement, now in a pilot phase until at least mid-2026, shuts the door on people who cannot safely wait or gather papers, including those fleeing war or persecution.

French advocacy organizations say they want an immediate suspension while the agreement is reviewed for compliance with international human rights and refugee law. As of October 14, 2025, France’s Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau has not signaled any move to pause the policy, despite mounting calls from civil society. In London, Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Home Secretary Yvette Cooper defend the pilot as a tool to deter dangerous Channel crossings and to disrupt smuggling operations.

According to analysis by VisaVerge.com, groups warn the treaty could create a chilling effect on claims if people believe they will be swiftly removed or placed in detention without a fair chance to explain their case. They argue that speed and paperwork hurdles are pushing people into legal limbo rather than offering a safe, orderly path.

Policy overview and timeline

• Treaty signed: July 2025
• In force / applied to arrivals from: August 6, 2025
• Pilot duration: at least until mid-2026
• Weekly cap: 50 returns matched by 50 legal admissions

Under the deal, the UK may return up to 50 people per week to France if they arrived illegally (largely by small boat), while admitting the same number from France who meet strict eligibility and documentation requirements.

Officials in Paris and London say the capped approach aims to reduce dangerous crossings and hand more control to authorities rather than smuggling groups. Supporters in Brussels have also signaled backing for the pilot as a new approach to migration management within Europe’s neighborhood. The French government has not publicly endorsed a suspension, and the UK government maintains that removals under the agreement are a necessary part of a broader plan to restore order to the asylum system.

Rights concerns and legal process

Human rights groups and advocates focus on how the treaty affects the ability to seek protection and access a fair review. Key concerns include:

• Denial of asylum claims
  • People returned to France under this policy may see their UK asylum claims deemed inadmissible, sometimes without a full review.
  • Critics say this could clash with Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which protects the right to seek asylum.
• Accelerated deportation timelines
  • The UK can deport people within 14 days of claim denial.
  • Advocates say this window is too short for proper legal advice or appeals, especially for those with trauma or limited English.

• Documentation barriers
  • Legal entry under the scheme requires complete identification (e.g., passport and a recent photograph).
  • People fleeing conflict or disaster often lack these documents, which may shut them out of the “one in” track.
• Legal limbo and detention
  • Those not promptly returned to France can face prolonged detention in the UK because return options to other countries are limited.
  • Advocates say this causes uncertainty and harms mental health.
• Humanitarian impact
  • Organizations warn the combined effect raises obstacles for people escaping danger, slows movement, and weakens chances to secure refuge.

Under the treaty’s design, the weekly balance is meant to keep returns and legal admissions aligned. Rights groups argue, however, that strict paperwork demands for the “one in” side—paired with fast removals on the “one out” side—tilt the process against those most at risk. They stress that families, unaccompanied minors, and survivors of trauma are particularly likely to lack documents or time to gather evidence.

For general official guidance on asylum procedures and inadmissibility decisions in the UK, readers can consult the UK Home Office Inadmissibility guidance, available through the Government Digital Service at Inadmissibility guidance, available through the Government Digital Service at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/inadmissibility-guidance.

Political response and next steps

• UK government position
  • Officials say the policy is part of a broader effort to curb illegal routes and break smugglers’ business models.
  • The Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, frames the pilot as one piece of a larger strategy to bring order and predictability to the system.
  • Prime Minister Keir Starmer emphasizes state control at the border and defends the removals as lawful and necessary.
• French government position
  • Interior Minister Bruno Retailleau has not committed to a suspension, despite repeated calls from rights groups.
  • Advocacy organizations ask France to ensure:
  • No one is removed unless they have had a fair process with access to legal help.
  • Vulnerable people are not blocked by documentation rules they cannot meet.
  • Any accelerated process allows sufficient time to prepare claims and appeal decisions.
• European response
  • The European Commission and several EU partners have signaled support for testing the pilot.
  • Supporters say the cap and strict criteria can reduce chaos and target criminal networks.
  • Opponents argue the capped approach offers too little relief and risks sidestepping core protections.

Key takeaways and warnings

Human rights groups want France to halt participation now and revisit the rules—especially the 14-day removal window and strict identity requirements—arguing the pilot risks denying people a fair chance to seek safety.

• The timetable is immediate: treaty signed July 2025, in force from August 2025, applied to arrivals from August 6, 2025.
• The weekly cap—50 returns matched by 50 legal admissions—remains unchanged.
• For people on the move, the stakes are immediate: inability to meet “one in” paperwork rules may mean rapid removal under the “one out” track or detention if removal stalls.

Advocacy groups maintain that these risks are precisely why France should suspend the agreement now, pending review, and confirm that every person who asks for safety receives a fair chance to be heard.