A VIETNAMESE man trafficked into Britain to work was unlawfully detained by the Home Office for 70 days, the High Court ruled today.

Thirty-four-year-old “CP” arrived in Britain on an unknown date when he was first stopped by West Mercia Police with three others in March 2016. Officers identified “general indicators of modern slavery” and made a referral to the National Crime Agency’s national referral mechanism (NRM), a framework for identifying and ensuring support for victims of trafficking.

He told police that he had paid about £15,000 to fly from Vietnam to France and later told Home Office officials that he had been smuggled into Britain in a lorry and was “still indebted to the agents.”

CP was eventually released, with nowhere to go, and said he was “picked up from a street in the Birmingham area by men and retrafficked.”

In April 2017 CP was sentenced to four months in jail for cannabis production. His lawyers said that CP should then have been referred to the NRM but instead he was issued with a deportation notice.

On release in May 2017, CP was transferred to Harmondsworth immigration removal centre. He told staff that his “agents” in France had assaulted him when he attempted to escape and that they had “[banged] his head repeatedly on the wall leading to unconsciousness.”

A psychiatric report prepared by his solicitors stated that CP was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder and that his detention was “perpetuating his symptoms and could be considered a continuation of his trauma.”

But, despite one of his case workers recommending he be released pending his outstanding trafficking and asylum claims, the Home Office kept him in detention because of his “previous negative immigration history.”

Judge Karon Monaghan ruled that the Home Office failed to “undertake any fair or proper consideration of whether the claimant was trafficked,” which rendered its decision that CP was not a victim of trafficking “irrational, unfair and unlawful.”

She also criticised the Home Office’s incomplete reasons for CP’s ongoing detention. One simply stated that “you have previously failed or refused to leave the United Kingdom set out the details when required to do so.”

Ms Monaghan found that “the whole period of [CP’s] detention was unlawful” and that he was therefore entitled to compensatory damages.

CP's solicitor Monika Glowacka said: “This judgment serves as a reminder to the [Home Office]  that they should adhere to their protective obligations and prioritise their duties to investigate trafficking claims, instead of detaining and attempting to deport vulnerable individuals.”