Immigration & Asylum Weekly: Key Developments (Week 6, 2026)

Last updated: 16 September 2026

Photo: United Nations Plaza - Teemu008

Welcome to the Immigration & Asylum Weekly — our roundup of key developments across the UK, US, Canada, Australia, Ireland, the European Union, deportations, and UN/UNHCR updates. This is Week 6 of 2026. Furthermore, this week saw significant legislative movement in the UK, continued asylum restriction rollout in the US, a major CJEU ruling on pushbacks, and the UNHCR's annual global displacement report. As a result, practitioners across all jurisdictions need to update their country guidance and procedural understanding. Each section below provides a focused update on the most significant developments.[1]

United Kingdom: Border Security Bill Passes Third Reading

The Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill passed its Third Reading in the House of Commons this week, advancing to the House of Lords. The bill introduces new criminal offences for facilitating illegal entry, expands the Home Secretary's powers to designate "safe" third countries for return, and provides for enhanced data-sharing with international partners. Furthermore, the bill's provisions on electronic monitoring of asylum seekers pending determination have attracted significant opposition from refugee law organisations, who argue that tagging is disproportionate for individuals who have committed no offence. As a result, the House of Lords is expected to introduce substantive amendments.[2]

Home Office statistics: April 2026 asylum figures

The Home Office published its quarterly asylum statistics this week. Key figures: asylum applications in Q1 2026 stand at 27,400 — down 12% from Q1 2025. The decrease is attributed in part to enhanced Channel enforcement operations. Furthermore, the grant rate for Sudanese applicants rose to 96% — reflecting the updated country guidance. The backlog of pending asylum decisions remains at approximately 140,000 cases, with the "Legacy" caseload (pre-2022) down to 18,000. As a result, backlogs are improving — but the rate of improvement has slowed. Therefore, practitioners should not expect rapid processing without proactive pressure.[3]

Upper Tribunal country guidance: Sudan

The Upper Tribunal signalled this week that updated country guidance on Sudan (to replace the existing SMO and KSP guidance) is in preparation, with a full hearing expected later in 2026. Furthermore, pending the new guidance, the existing guidance is supplemented by the Home Office's updated Sudan CPIN (Country Policy and Information Note) published in February 2026. As a result, practitioners are advised to rely on the Sudan CPIN and the UNHCR position paper (April 2025) until the new country guidance is promulgated. Therefore, all pending Sudanese cases should include both documents in the evidence bundle.[4]

United States: USCIS Policy Updates and White House Executive Action

The US administration issued a new Executive Order this week directing USCIS to suspend processing of parole-based humanitarian programmes for nationals of Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela (CHNV) pending a programme review. Furthermore, the administration announced expanded use of the "expedited removal" process to cover non-US nationals apprehended within 100 miles of the border who cannot demonstrate 14 days' continuous presence. As a result, immigration advocacy organisations filed emergency injunctions in federal courts in the Southern District of New York and the Northern District of California. Therefore, the legal status of the CHNV suspensions is contested and developments should be tracked closely.[5]

Third country removals: El Salvador agreement

The US and El Salvador announced an expanded third-country removal agreement this week, allowing the US to remove non-Salvadoran nationals to El Salvador as a "safe third country." Furthermore, a similar agreement with Guatemala (the "Asylum Cooperative Agreement") has been re-activated under the new administration. As a result, asylum seekers from third countries — including Sudanese, Venezuelans, and Chinese nationals — face the prospect of removal to Central America rather than adjudication of their US asylum claims. Therefore, practitioners should monitor court challenges to these agreements, several of which are pending in federal appeals courts.[6]

Canada: IRCC Processing Update and IRB Staffing

Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) published its April 2026 processing update this week. The Refugee Protection Division (RPD) of the Immigration and Refugee Board (IRB) is processing claims at an average of 22 months from receipt to decision — the longest average in five years. Furthermore, the IRB announced an emergency appointment of 45 additional decision-makers specifically for Sudanese, Afghan, and Ukrainian claims. As a result, accelerated processing is expected for these three nationalities in the second half of 2026. Therefore, Sudanese claimants in Canada should advise their representatives to monitor scheduling updates from the IRB.[7]

Bill C-71: Safe Third Country Agreement expansion

The Canadian Senate approved amendments to Bill C-71 this week, expanding the Safe Third Country Agreement (STCA) with the United States to cover all land and water crossings — not just official ports of entry. The amendment has been criticised by refugee law advocates, who note that the US Supreme Court's recent rulings on asylum have significantly reduced the protection available to claimants in the US. Furthermore, the Federal Court of Canada had previously struck down an earlier STCA expansion as unconstitutional (Canadian Council for Refugees v Canada, 2023 FCA 113). As a result, constitutional challenges to the new expansion are anticipated. Therefore, practitioners should monitor Federal Court filings.[8]

Australia: Home Affairs — Deportation Policy and Offshore Processing

The Australian Department of Home Affairs announced this week that it will resume offshore processing of asylum seekers at Nauru under a revised framework agreement. Furthermore, the government stated that individuals who attempt to arrive in Australia by sea will not be eligible for protection visas in Australia — only for resettlement in Nauru or third countries. As a result, human rights organisations have condemned the policy as a violation of Australia's obligations under the 1951 Refugee Convention and the Convention Against Torture. Therefore, legal challenges in the Federal Court of Australia are expected. The UNHCR has called on Australia to reconsider the resumption of offshore processing.[9]

Ireland: IPO and International Protection

The Irish International Protection Office (IPO) published its April 2026 statistics this week. Applications: 3,200 new applications in Q1 2026 — down from 4,100 in Q1 2025. Furthermore, the IPO's accelerated process for EU-designated "safe countries of origin" has reduced processing times for Georgian, Albanian, and Kosovan applicants to an average of 6 weeks. However, Sudanese applicants continue to experience processing delays of up to 18 months at the International Protection Appeals Tribunal (IPAT). As a result, Sudanese claimants in Ireland face a de facto protection gap despite the strength of their substantive claims. Therefore, practitioners should consider judicial review of unreasonable delay in appropriate cases.[10]

European Union: CJEU Ruling on Pushbacks; EU Pact Implementation

The Court of Justice of the European Union issued a landmark judgment this week in the case of Federación de Asociaciones de Ayuda a las Personas sin Hogar v Spain (C-821/24), ruling that collective expulsions at the EU's external borders violate the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU (Article 19, prohibition on collective expulsions) and cannot be justified by emergency circumstances. Furthermore, the Court clarified that the right to request asylum under the EU Asylum Procedures Directive applies at the border — not only after entry into the territory. As a result, Member States operating pushbacks at land borders (Greece, Croatia, Hungary, Poland) are directly in breach of EU law. Therefore, the judgment is expected to be cited in challenges to border practices across the EU.[11]

EU Pact on Migration and Asylum: 2026 implementation

The EU Pact on Migration and Asylum — adopted in 2024 — is entering its implementation phase. Key elements include: mandatory border procedures for applicants from designated "safe countries of origin"; the "solidarity mechanism" allowing Member States to choose between relocating asylum seekers or making financial contributions; and enhanced data-sharing through Eurodac. Furthermore, several Member States (Austria, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia) have indicated non-compliance or slow implementation of the solidarity mechanism. As a result, the Commission has opened infringement proceedings. Therefore, the Pact's practical impact on asylum seekers remains uncertain while implementation disputes continue.[12]

Deportations: Key Developments

Several significant deportation developments emerged this week. First, the UK's High Court suspended a deportation flight to Iraq carrying 12 individuals after the Iraqi court's finding in the Iraqi claimants' case that certain northern Iraq regions cannot be treated as safe. Second, Germany resumed deportation flights to Afghanistan — the first since the 2021 Taliban takeover — targeting individuals with criminal convictions. Third, the US conducted its largest deportation flight of 2026 to El Salvador (220 individuals), including Salvadoran nationals with criminal convictions as well as Venezuelan nationals under the third-country removal agreement. Furthermore, UNHCR issued a statement condemning the German deportation flights to Afghanistan as contrary to its position on returns to Afghanistan. As a result, all three deportation actions are subject to ongoing legal challenges.[13]

European Court of Human Rights: Key Decisions

The European Court of Human Rights issued three significant decisions this week in the immigration and asylum sphere. First, X v Netherlands (Application No. 14223/24): the Court found a violation of Article 3 in the deportation of a Pakistani Ahmadi Christian to Pakistan, where conditions for the community remain dangerous. Second, Y v France (Application No. 38844/23): inadmissible; the Court found that the French courts had adequately assessed the risk and the applicant could not establish a well-founded claim. Third, Z v Greece (Application No. 72211/23): found violation of Article 5 (right to liberty) in the detention of an asylum seeker for 14 months without adequate review. Furthermore, the Z v Greece decision adds to a substantial body of ECHR case law on unlawful immigration detention in Greece. As a result, practitioners should monitor ECHR decisions as real-time country guidance for European jurisdictions.[14]

UN and UNHCR: Global Displacement Report 2026

The UNHCR published its annual Global Trends Report this week, reporting 122 million forcibly displaced people worldwide as of end-2025 — a record for the third consecutive year. Sudan contributed the largest single addition to global IDP figures (9M+), with Sudanese crossing into Chad now exceeding 700,000 and total Sudanese refugees globally reaching 3.2M. Furthermore, the report notes that resettlement offers from developed countries covered only 3% of the UNHCR-identified resettlement need — down from 5% in 2023. The UNHCR called on states to increase humanitarian funding, expand legal pathways, and uphold the principle of non-refoulement. As a result, the funding gap for Sudan alone stands at approximately $1.5 billion for the 2026 humanitarian response.[15]

UNHCR Sudan: updated guidance

The UNHCR updated its Sudan technical note this week, confirming that the April 2025 position on non-return remains in force and reiterating that all areas of Sudan are affected by the conflict. Furthermore, UNHCR noted that the RSF offensive into Sennar and White Nile has created new displacement waves not reflected in 2025 country guidance. As a result, practitioners should download the latest UNHCR Sudan technical note for inclusion in evidence bundles. Therefore, any country guidance based only on 2025 materials should be updated with this week's UNHCR note.[16]