UK (Parliament Politics Magazine) – Home Office faces legal challenge over algorithms guiding deportations, with claims of bias and insufficient human oversight of migrants.
As reported by The Telegraph, legal action could halt Home Office deportations over its allegedly unlawful use of algorithms.
How Privacy International could block Home Office migrant deportations?
Privacy International, a charity focused on migrant rights, has submitted a 94-page complaint to the Information Commissioner. It alleges the Home Office is violating data laws in how it deports and monitors migrants.
The charity’s claims could delay or even block deportations of migrants and foreign nationals. This issue is a central part of Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer’s policy to reduce Channel crossings and curb record migrant arrivals.
The organisation previously challenged the ‘unlawful’ use of electronic tags on migrants. The Information Commissioner required the Home Office to halt the practice or face prosecution under privacy law.
The new legal case focuses on Home Office algorithms. They guide caseworkers in deciding which migrants to detain, deport, or tag.
The algorithms assess a migrant’s nationality, age, personal history, and immigration claim. They produce recommendations for caseworkers on detention, deportation, and tagging.
Privacy International alleges the automated algorithms are biased toward deportation. They argue the system keeps migrants on tags unlawfully.
Caseworkers must justify only when they reject a deportation recommendation, not when they accept it. Privacy International says this creates a bias toward quick removals and reduces oversight on life-changing decisions.
The Home Office tagging system uses a “harm score” to determine how long migrants remain on ankle tags. They are then moved to a non-fitted device, where biometric data must be submitted several times daily.
What did charity say about migrant tagging and data use?
The charity, in its letter to the Information Commissioner, stated,
“There is no clear and adequate justification for requiring caseworkers to provide an answer when rejecting a recommendation, but not when accepting one.”
It argued migrants had no clear idea how their data was being used by the algorithms.
The charity said,
“No information is provided at all to [the migrants] concerning how their data is processed by the tool. The use of [the algorithm] may result in wholly opaque profiling…there is a risk that individuals flagged for a recommendation are more likely to have enforcement action taken against them.”
Privacy International, in its submission, stated,
“There is a significant risk that the tool systematically profiles individuals in a way that results in continuous 24/7 GPS tracking, regardless of their vulnerabilities.”
The charity’s analysis found that only 16 of 1,768 migrant tagging reviews ended with electronic monitoring. In 210 cases, conditions were eased to allow a non-fitted device, while 1,542 remained on ankle tags.
It said,
“The two algorithms are put into place without sufficient safeguards for the right to privacy and data protection standards.”
They added,
“Individuals, already in vulnerable situations due to their migration status, can be subjected to life-changing decisions without sufficient human supervision and intervention, including detention and removal from the UK, or being subjected to GPS tags based on automated harm scores.”
Illegal migrants and foreign criminals in the UK
Small boat arrivals to the UK rose to 44,125 in the year ending March 2025, a 14% increase from the previous year, with 86% coming by small boats. Despite this rise, only about 3% of small boat arrivals between 2018 and 2024 were returned to their countries.
In 2025, 5,154 Foreign National Offenders were returned, a 21% increase, with Albanians making up 24–37% annually. Albanian nationals led enforced returns at 29% (2,530), though numbers are slightly falling.