‘Rwanda Plan’: Court Blocks UK Govt Processing Migrant Asylum Claims Abroad

LONDON, ENGLAND - JUNE 20: Home Secretary Suella Braverman arrives for a cabinet meeting a
Getty Images

The London Court of Appeals has ruled against the High Court’s previous judgement, finding that Rwanda is not a safe country for deportations and thereby ruling out the UK government’s resettlement scheme.

Senior judges found two-to-one that Rwanda, with whose government the UK has signed a memorandum of understanding to pay for the African nation to host irregular migrants on its behalf, is not actually a safe country. Having reached this decision, the Rwanda deportation plan of Suella Braverman becomes unworkable because the government is not permitted to deport to ‘unsafe’ countries.

The government can appeal the decision at the Supreme Court, and is reported to be doing so. It is conceivable it could then be appealed yet again, to the European Court of Human Rights. As things stand, the progress of the long-discussed Rwanda scheme is pretty much exactly in line with the prediction of Brexit leader Nigel Farage, who dismissed it as an illusion conjured at the end of the Conservatives’ time in power and doomed to be endlessly challenged in court until the party is — as seems likely now — voted out next year.

As it is, the Conservative Party has now had 13 years in power in the United Kingdom, and immigration is higher than ever, breaking new records annually. Prime Minister Sunak has repeatedly spoken of increasing the size of the workforce as a means to tackle inflation in recent weeks.

The Rwanda scheme itself is a plan to pay a third party — in this case Rwanda — to house migrants who have come to the United Kingdom by ‘irregular means’ while their asylum claims are processed, and then thereafter. The logic of the plan dictates that as long as those legitimately claiming asylum are kept safe, it doesn’t actually matter where that happens. Besides, the cost of living in Kigali is considerably cheaper than London, so it would work out as better value for money for British taxpayers.

Critics say Rwanda isn’t actually as safe as claimed and assert the Rwandan government wouldn’t keep to its side of the bargain. Rwanda itself has rejected the ruling, saying it was disappointed to be accused of being unsafe. Per The Guardian, they said in a statement: “While this is ultimately a decision for the UK’s judicial system, we do take issue with the ruling that Rwanda is not a safe country for asylum seekers and refugees.

Rwanda is one of the safest countries in the world and we have been recognised by the UNHCR and other international institutions for our exemplary treatment of refugees… Rwanda remains fully committed to making this partnership work. The broken global migration system is failing to protect the vulnerable, and empowering criminal smuggling gangs at an immeasurable human cost. When the migrants do arrive, we will welcome them and provide them with the support they’ll need to build new lives in Rwanda.”


Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.