This judgement, in 1999, made it obvious and unambiguous that an immediate application for asylum is not required.SC ruling July 1999 (R v Uxbridge) - Immigration and Asylum Act - passed in November 1999. Not 9 years. The sec 31 defences was considered an 11th hour amendment widely reported as such in the legal press.
The judgement continues by stating that referral to the Home office is required:24. On the previous page, however, appears this: "A person crossing the frontier illegally may have reasons for not giving himself up at the nearest frontier control point or to a local authority in the border zone. If he succeeds in finding his way to the capital or another major city and presents himself to the authorities there he must be deemed to have complied with the requirement and the same ought to apply if he was unsuccessful but could show that such was his intention."
25. If Mr Adimi’s intention was to claim asylum within a short time of his arrival even had he successfully secured entry on his false documents, then I would not think it right to regard him as having breached this condition.
31. The applicants submit that in the case of all refugees apprehended with false documents, whether on entry or in transit, there should be no prosecution rising out of the possession or presentation of such papers until the Secretary of State has determined the asylum claim
Now the other document to which you refer, was enacted in 2018
After 23 years UNHCR, don't appear to share your view . They have little power other than the odd press statement and academic report. https://www.unhcr.org/5a1b53607.pdf. If they wished to take action against the UK, they would need a resolution, which of course would need to be backed by all the states exercising similar immigration controls.
So wrong again
Now you're either struggling to read the dates correctly, or you are wilfully misrepresenting the evidence. The 2018 Code was issued by a different Government, a right wing anti-migrant Government.The Code for Crown Prosecutors
26 October 2018|Publication
The UNHCR is laid down, and signatories signed it understanding its contents. If a signatory passes legislation that undermines that UNHCR, the domestic law has little effect, and is intended only for domestic consumption.
As far as the jurisdiction of the UNHCR is concerned, all refugees have a right of appeal to the UNHCR.
The decision is made by a UNHCR officer. See bottom of post.
Moreover, the UNHCR operates a 'watching brief' over states RSD determination.
Refugee Status Determination, or RSD, is the legal or administrative process by which governments or UNHCR determine whether a person seeking international protection is considered a refugee under international, regional or national law. RSD is often a vital process in helping refugees realize their rights under international law.
States have the primary responsibility to conduct RSD, however, UNHCR may conduct RSD under its mandate when a state is not a party to the 1951 Refugee Convention and/or does not have a fair and efficient national asylum procedure in place.
UNHCR works closely with states to support and capacitate them in taking over increased responsibility for RSD and with improving their RSD systems
Refugee Status Determination | UNHCR
www.unhcr.org