Hundreds of asylum seekers at the UK’s Brooke House Immigration Removal Center are trapped by the government’s controversial “One In, One Out” policy. Designed to reduce small boat crossings by swapping newly arriving refugees with a limited number allowed entry from northern France, the policy has left many in detention unsure about their future. While some face imminent exile to France, others remain locked in limbo, fearing forced returns to unsafe environments.
USA’s Cole Hocker Disqualified from 1500m Semi-Final at World Championships
What Happened at Brooke House?
Asylum seekers from countries like Eritrea are among those held at Brooke House, where they await deportation to France under the new scheme. The government’s policy exchanges refugees who entered the UK irregularly by small boats with a small number legally entering from northern France.
For many detainees, the policy has sparked confusion and fear. Individuals like Fessahaye, along with his partner and other detainees, describe harsh conditions, limited access to legal assistance, and the constant threat of being sent back to places they fled from—often after surviving torture, trafficking, or police abuse.
Despite growing protests from activists and humanitarian organizations, authorities continue implementing the policy to curb the rising number of small boat crossings across the English Channel.
Who Is Fessahaye?
Fessahaye, an asylum seeker from Eritrea, fled severe human rights abuses, including military oppression and forced labor. After enduring torture and enslavement in Libya, he finally sought refuge in the UK. Now trapped in detention, he faces deportation to France, a country where he claims to have faced further police brutality and persecution.
His story reflects the plight of many asylum seekers—displaced by war, violence, and exploitation, only to encounter more uncertainty and trauma in the asylum process.
Background: The “One In, One Out” Policy
The UK government’s “One In, One Out” policy aims to control migration by balancing the number of refugees entering irregularly through small boats with those legally entering from other countries. However, critics argue that the policy treats refugees as mere numbers and fails to address the underlying causes driving migration, such as war, persecution, and poverty.
Asylum seekers like Fessahaye often suffer from severe trauma, including smuggling, sexual violence, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Many lack access to essential services like legal representation, safe housing, and healthcare, leaving them vulnerable to further harm.
Public and Social Media Reactions
The policy has faced widespread backlash from human rights groups and refugee advocates:
✔ Olivia Clarke, from Refugee Legal Aid, and Emma Gin, from Medical Justice, have condemned the policy for its harmful effects on vulnerable people.
✔ Organizations such as the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants and l’Auberge des Migrants have called it inhumane, urging airlines like Air France to refuse participation in forced deportations.
❌ Social media is filled with anger and frustration as more testimonies emerge from detainees, highlighting the fear, isolation, and uncertainty caused by the policy.
Official Statement and What Happens Next
The UK Home Office continues to defend the policy, citing the need to control irregular crossings across the English Channel. However, the approach has been criticized not only for its moral implications but also for worsening the suffering of asylum seekers.
Reports from detention centers reveal growing fear among detainees, with many left in the dark about the outcomes of their deportation cases. While some have successfully challenged their removal orders, many remain trapped in uncertainty, awaiting decisions that could send them back to unsafe conditions.
Conclusion: A Crisis of Compassion and Policy
The “One In, One Out” policy highlights the delicate balance between border control and humanitarian responsibility. For asylum seekers like Fessahaye, fleeing violence and persecution only to face indefinite detention and forced deportation to unsafe countries is a devastating injustice. The controversy surrounding the policy reflects a broader crisis in how nations respond to migration and protect human rights. As the debate continues, the urgent need for compassionate, fair, and effective immigration solutions remains at the forefront of global concern.