Asylum campaigners welcomed the climbdown on the right to appeal

The legislation proposed outlawing the right to appeal asylum decisions in the High Court through judicial review.

But opening a House of Lords debate on the Bill, the lord chancellor said he would make changes to the appeals plans so judges could supervise the system.

Lord Falconer said the system both had to be fair and cut down on abuses.

The climbdown has been welcomed by lawyers and campaigners for refugees' rights.

Irvine intervention

Under the bill as it stands, asylum seekers would be allowed only one appeal - to the same tribunal as made the original decision, and not to the higher courts.

The Law Society, the Bar Council and Justice joined senior judges in calling for the plans to be abandoned, warning they could cost lives.

And the most senior judge in England and Wales, Lord Woolf, said the plans would go against the basic principle of the rule of law.

He told the House of Lords on Monday he welcomed the change of policy.

Lord Woolf says plans go against the basic principle of the rule of law

He said: "I am sure the announcement will be greeted with approval by the judiciary and indeed by everyone who is committed to the upholding within this country of the rule of law."

Lord Falconer acknowledged the widespread opposition, saying his predecessor as Lord Chancellor, Lord Irvine, had "forcibly made representations" about the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of claimants) Bill.

The lord chancellor told peers the government was determined to reduce the time taken by the appeals process, which could stretch to 62 weeks.

Some claimants deliberately delayed the system so they could claim benefits and housing, he argued.

But he added: "The system also needs to ensure we have proper judicial oversight. We do not have that right yet."

Lord Falconer said he believed it was possible to both cut delays and have the system overseen by the higher courts.

'Sensible option'

He said the government was prepared to bring forward amendments to replace existing review procedures "with a new system allowing oversight by the administrative court (the part of the High Court which hears judicial review cases) in those decisions".

"That system must ensure speed is increased and abuse is reduced."

The Bill received an unopposed second reading from peers. It is not yet known when details of the government's proposed changes will be revealed.

Maeve Sherlock, of the Refugee Council, said the government was taking "the sensible option" in reviewing its plans.

'Wholeheartedly thankful'

A Bar Council spokesman said: "This is a major climbdown by the Home Office because the initial drafting of the Bill was absolutely categorical in saying there could be no judicial oversight.

"It's a very significant change of heart and one which we are wholeheartedly thankful for."

Shadow Home Secretary David Davis said he welcomed the lord chancellor's decision to drop "unworkable" proposals.

And Mark Oaten, the Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, said he was glad to see the government drop a "grubby measure" to strip asylum seekers of their right to a court appeal.