Full Breakdown
New Credibility Tests Threaten Trafficking Victims in UK Immigration Bill
By Drooid · · How we work
Core Event
The government’s immigration and asylum bill introduces “credibility tests” for anyone making a claim of modern-day slavery or human trafficking. Under the new rules, Home Office officials must treat any delay, inconsistency, omission, or striking similarity to another claim as a reason to question the claimant’s credibility. Critics say the measures could deny recognition and support to survivors of sexual violence, including women who allege they were abused by the late billionaire Mohamed Al Fayed.
Background & Context
The credibility provisions are presented as a way to close perceived loopholes in the National Referral Mechanism (NRM), the system that identifies potential victims of modern slavery in the UK. The government argues the changes will reduce misuse of the NRM and speed the removal of illegal migrants. Allegations against Al Fayed span decades; many survivors delayed reporting until after his death in 2023 and after Harrods announced in 2024 that non-disclosure agreements would no longer be enforced.
Criticism & Opposition
Eleanor Lyons, the independent anti-slavery commissioner, warned that the credibility tests are “fundamentally unfair” and could re-victimise survivors whose trauma often impairs memory and who may have delayed reporting.
No One Above, a collective of survivors, described the tests as “absurd” because the victims’ stories are “really similar.”
Hilary Agg, head of policy and research at the anti-slavery charity Unseen, argued the measures would allow trafficking to thrive by reducing the number of victims identified and able to assist police.
Eleanora Fais, anti-trafficking monitoring coordinator at Anti-Slavery International, said the legislation prioritises immigration enforcement over safeguarding, undermining the NRM’s original purpose of supporting disclosure and cooperation with law enforcement.
Verbatim Quotes
- “They are basically saying to victims, if you don’t come forward in a timely fashion not yet defined, if there are inconsistencies in your account, and if there are similarities between exploitation and [those of] others, the Home Office decision-maker must question your credibility,” — Eleanor Lyons
- “Fayed had a specific strategy for trafficking and assaulting women, and many of our stories are really similar. To say someone shouldn’t be believed because their situation is too similar to another victim of that same abuser is absurd.” — No One Above, a collective of survivors of Fayed’s alleged abuse
- “It took that for me to finally believe that I couldn’t have somebody take my house away for speaking out.” — Pelham Spong
- “The thought of speaking out as a 23-year-old with no money, no resources behind me against a billionaire was unfathomable,” — Pelham Spong
- “The NRM was always meant to help survivors to disclose and be referred to support needed for the recovery. Alongside that, if they wished to, they could cooperate with police to ensure that perpetrators were brought to justice. If you introduce these criteria to weaken the system, that’s not going to happen.” — Hilary Agg