A HOME Office decision to detain torture survivors fleeing persecution was unlawful, the High Court has ruled.

Seven former detainees including sex trafficking victims and a man who was beaten, knifed and flogged in homophobic attacks launched a judicial review over the UK’s new definition of torture.

Backed by the charity Medical Justice, which helps around 1000 people every year, they argued this new definition was unreasonably narrow and meant many survivors would no longer be treated as torture victims.

Yesterday Mr Justice Ouseley ruled in their favour after hearing how they were locked up while their asylum claims were processed even though doctors had submitted evidence of their ordeals.

Giving his decision in London, the judge said aspects of the statutory guidance set by officials were “unlawful”.

Lawyers called the judgement a “great victory” for their clients.

Medical Justice said: “The Home Office may face dozens of unlawful detention claims and is being forced to change how it treats thousands of torture victims in detention.

“Narrowing the definition of torture by the Home Office demonstrates its sheer contempt for vulnerable detainees whose lives it is responsible for.

“There is ample justification for immediately releasing all detained adults at risk so they can access the care and support they need in the community.”

The seven challengers included a 21-year-old Afghan man who was kidnapped by the Taliban at the age of five and later beaten, stabbed and thrown off a mountain.

In a statement responding to the ruling, the Home Office said it had aimed to ensure “fewer people with a confirmed vulnerability will be detained”, and that those held would be in custody “for the shortest period necessary”.

The department went on: “The government is now considering how it can best address the court’s findings in relation to the statutory guidance.”

The judge said the detention guidance “lacked a rational or evidence basis” and the new definition of torture “would require medical practitioners to reach conclusions on political issues which they cannot rationally be asked to reach”.

David Isaac, chairman of the Equality and Human Rights Commission, which intervened in the case, said: “People who have been subjected to torture should not be kept in immigration detention.

“This unlawful policy has been scrapped, but the government should now go further and strengthen the human rights protections for people in immigration detention.”

One of the claimants, known only as Mr P, who suffered homophobic violence, said: “It is difficult to believe that the Home Office could happily detain me, knowing that I was tortured.

“It affected me greatly to be subjected to this unlawful policy. It has left a scar in my life that will never be healed.

“Although I was recognised as a refugee by an independent tribunal, the reminder of being detained as a torture survivor is torture in itself.

“The policy allowed the Home Office to turn a blind eye to my suffering and the suffering of hundreds of other torture survivors.

“Although I welcome the decision, it is still upsetting that the Home Office, who should protect people like me, rejected me and put me in detention which reminded me of the ordeal I suffered in my country of origin.

“I hope that the decision will benefit other survivors of torture held in immigration detention and it will prevent the Home Office from implementing a policy that will hurt vulnerable individuals in the future.”

Labour’s Shadow Home Secretary Diane Abbott said: “The idea that this country would lock up people who were victims of torture is truly shocking.

“The Conservative Government must show it is serious about adhering to principles of human dignity and radically overhaul how immigration detention works.”