Reform UK proposes mass deportation plan targeting all illegal migrants

(UNITED KINGDOM) Reform UK leader Nigel Farage on August 26, 2025 set out a mass deportation plan that he says would remove roughly 600,000 asylum seekers and other migrants judged to have entered the country illegally during the first term of a Reform government. Branded as Operation Restoring Justice, the five-year emergency program would bring immediate detention on arrival, fast removal with no right of appeal, and a sweeping rewrite of the United Kingdom’s human rights and asylum laws to block legal challenges.

Farage said women and children would be included, while admitting the special care needed for minors. The package, unveiled just as Reform UK’s polling has surged, would pivot Britain toward a policy model Farage openly links to measures championed by President Trump in the 🇺🇸 United States.

The plan is not current law. It would only proceed if Reform UK wins the next general election and secures the votes to pass a new Illegal Migration (Mass Deportations) Bill. Farage argues the current system has failed to deter small boat crossings and has left ministers tied up in court for years. His solution would be blunt: immediate detention for anyone who arrives illegally, mass returns to home countries or to third countries such as Rwanda and Albania, and a legal firewall stopping British courts from hearing asylum claims from these arrivals.

Scope, numbers, and immediate questions

The scale is central to the political pitch. Reform UK says it would aim to deport about 600,000 people within five years. That figure raises questions about data sources and feasibility.

• As of mid-2024, there were 224,742 cases in the asylum system, according to public statistics.
• Fewer than 100,000 people were reportedly waiting for a decision by August 2025.
• Farage has said the intent is to cover “all illegal entrants,” not just those in the most recent backlog, but he acknowledged difficulty in defining how far back that would reach.

Farage insists this approach would restore control to the border: “If you come illegally, you will be detained and you will be removed.” Backers inside Reform UK say international treaties and court rulings leave the Home Office stuck; their headline promise is to make removals the default and to stop the legal appeals that often stall deportation flights.

Legal and constitutional challenges

Critics across the legal field—including former Attorney General Dominic Grieve—say the plans would likely run straight into the British constitution and common law.

• They argue courts would not accept a total removal of judicial oversight where individual liberty is at stake.
• Human rights groups warn that a blanket ban on appeals risks sending people back to danger and breaking long-held safeguards.
• The central legal question: how far can a government fast-track removals without violating binding commitments or the powers of the courts?

Legal Framework and Enforcement Machinery

The core of Operation Restoring Justice is a legal overhaul. Reform UK would:

• Withdraw the UK from the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and repeal the Human Rights Act.
• For five years, suspend the UK’s application of the 1951 Refugee Convention, the UN Convention Against Torture, and the Council of Europe Anti-Trafficking Convention.
• Introduce the Illegal Migration (Mass Deportations) Bill, creating a duty on the Home Secretary to remove anyone arriving illegally and stripping courts of jurisdiction to consider asylum claims from those arrivals.

Enforcement mechanisms proposed include:

• A new UK Deportation Command—a specialist unit to find, detain, and remove people quickly.
• A Data Fusion Centre to link police, Home Office, NHS, DVLA, HMRC, and bank data to track addresses, identities, and money flows.
• A projected detention estate repurposing military bases to provide 24,000 places within 18 months at a cost of £2.5 billion.
• A £2,500 payment to those who agree to voluntary departure to home countries or designated third countries.
• Sanctions on uncooperative countries: cuts to UK aid, visa restrictions, or other measures to secure returns.

Zia Yusuf, presented as Reform UK’s Head of Government Efficiency, joined Farage at the launch to stress scaled operations and cross-agency systems.

Operational sequence (on paper)

1. Detection: match data to locate people judged to be in the UK illegally.
2. Detention: arrest and hold in secure facilities, mainly former military sites.
3. Processing: no asylum claim accepted and no appeal allowed for illegal arrivals.
4. Removal: flights to home or third countries; £2,500 offered for voluntary return.
5. Diplomacy: use aid, visas, and sanctions to secure cooperation on returns.

Farage’s team says law, detention space, enforcement staff, and international agreements must move in lockstep to stop delays. Legal experts warn that even a strong parliamentary majority cannot switch off common law duties to ensure basic fairness.

Financial and logistical realities

Reform UK budgets £2.5 billion for initial detention infrastructure—excluding ongoing running costs:

• Excluded items: charter flights, escorts, staffing, on-site healthcare and schooling, legal defenses, and diplomatic negotiation costs.
• The £2,500 voluntary departure offer adds a significant variable cost.
• To deport 600,000 people over five years, the system would need sustained flight capacity, thousands of trained staff, and cooperation from many countries.

Key logistical questions:

• How many detention beds can realistically open within 18 months without long planning fights?
• How will the government staff new sites and set up healthcare, child protection, and legal notifications at scale?
• If thousands refuse voluntary return despite the £2,500 incentive, how many charter flights per week would be needed?
• If countries refuse to accept nationals, would the UK detain people indefinitely?

British courts have historically ruled against open-ended detention, which suggests judges may intervene.

Feasibility, human impact, and political stakes

The inclusion of women and children is one of the plan’s most contested elements. Farage confirmed families and minors would be covered, while admitting the complexity.

• Safeguarding rules, schooling, and medical care pose daily tests inside any detention estate.
• Human rights groups warn prolonged confinement causes lasting harm to children; social workers and pediatricians stress even short detention can be traumatic.
• Reform UK counters that excluding families would create a loophole for smugglers.

Experts also question the numbers:

• With fewer than 100,000 awaiting decisions by August 2025, the target of 600,000 is said to reflect a wider, harder-to-locate pool.
• Many people with rejected claims leave official contact points; enforcement becomes more complex, especially for overstayers, expired visas, and those who entered clandestinely.
• A share may have valid alternative routes (family ties, trafficking protections) usually assessed by caseworkers or courts.

Supporters say speed is the point: fast removal will break the smugglers’ business model. Critics say taking away appeals will send people back to danger and damage the UK’s international standing.

Legal, diplomatic, and practical obstacles

• Legal groups argue judges have a duty to ensure state actions are lawful and fair, especially when liberty is at stake. They expect immediate court challenges if Parliament tries to suppress judicial oversight.
• Diplomatic tools such as aid and visa leverage may secure some returns but risk souring relations and harming cooperation on security, trade, and regional crises.
• Third-country deals (e.g., Rwanda, Albania) face scrutiny over conditions and long-term outcomes; the Rwanda pathway itself has prompted significant litigation in the UK.

Practical lessons from past attempts:

• Smaller-scale charter flights have been delayed by last-minute legal orders, sometimes on medical or trafficking grounds.
• Returns may fail if documentation is wrong or if a receiving country changes stance.
• Lawyers stress duties to identify trafficking victims and protect people at risk of torture—duties Reform UK proposes suspending for five years.

Human consequences and day-to-day realities

Under the plan, anyone arriving illegally would face:

• Arrest, transfer to a secure base, and removal on the next available flight—without a chance to ask a judge to stop it.
• Families would be kept together in detention, potentially for weeks or months.
• People with health problems, trauma, or disabilities would rely on newly built on-site services.

If a receiving country refuses to take someone, the plan does not clearly state how long that person would remain detained before release or alternative measures are considered.

Logistical math:

• To remove 600,000 people in five years = 120,000 removals per year = >2,300 removals per week.
• Even with voluntary departures, the flight schedule, escorts, and receiving-country clearances would be demanding.
• Detention space for 24,000 within 18 months could ease bottlenecks but would not eliminate the need for rapid onward movement.

Definitions and scope of enforcement

Farage says the intent is to target all who entered without permission, not just recent Channel crossings. That would extend enforcement beyond coastal arrivals to:

• Overstayers
• People with expired visas
• Those who entered hidden in lorries
• People living “under the radar” for years

Supporters argue this broader push restores the rule of law; critics warn it could sweep up people with family ties, work ties, or complex protection claims requiring careful review.

Political context and likely trajectory

• Reform UK has four MPs, but polling near 30% reflects public concern about small boat arrivals.
• The shift pressures the Labour government and divides the Conservatives, many of whom favor tougher steps but question legal survivability and international fallout.
• Farage says only radical change will work and that his party is prepared to act within a single parliament.

Supporters call it a firm reset, focusing on failures to remove people with final refusals and rising hotel bills. Opponents argue it would breach the UK’s role in refugee protection and break common law traditions.

What would determine success or failure?

Several linked elements must align:

• Legal: draft laws that survive judicial scrutiny or reshape judicial powers.
• Operational: build detention capacity, staff, aircraft, and case-processing systems.
• Diplomatic: secure cooperation from multiple countries on returns.
• Financial: fund initial infrastructure and ongoing removal operations, including voluntary return payments.

If any link fails—law, logistics, or diplomacy—the project risks slowing or stalling and likely triggering prolonged litigation and political fallout.

Data and further reading

The current government’s official figures provide context for the scale and feasibility of any future drive to increase removals. Readers can consult the Home Office’s published statistics at the link below for the most up-to-date picture of applications, decisions, and returns:

• Immigration system statistics: quarterly release

Key takeaways (blockquote)

Operation Restoring Justice is a far-reaching proposal to deport about 600,000 people within five years by removing judicial appeals, suspending key international treaties for five years, and building a large detention-and-removal infrastructure. Its success would depend on legal permissibility, operational capacity, diplomatic cooperation, and sustained funding—any shortfall in those areas would likely produce prolonged litigation, political dispute, and logistical bottlenecks.

For people working in the asylum system—caseworkers, lawyers, and charity staff—the debate feels familiar: big promises, tough trade-offs, and a chain of details that decides whether grand plans last. Even proponents acknowledge that the care of children, screening for trafficking victims, and checks against wrongful removal cannot be brushed aside—systems moving at speed need accurate data, trained staff, and strong oversight to avoid mistakes.