- A court of Appeal in the UK has termed unlawful the plan to deport thousands of asylum seekers to Rwanda.
- Authorities in Kigali say Rwanda is one of the safest countries in the world.
- British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is under increasing pressure to counter massive waves on immigrants landing on UK shores.
The ruling by UK Court of Appeal that Rwanda is not a safe country for asylum seekers has left authorities in Kigali angry after judges cast doubt on the East African Community member country’s security and ability to host people fleeing persecution from their homelands.
Putting refugees at risk
The UK government is accused of putting refugees at risk by deporting them to a nation that does not defend the rights or safety of political opponents. Authorities in Rwanda are, however, reacting angrily to the Court of Appeal’s decision.
Yolande Makolo, a spokeswoman for the Rwandan government, stated that although the judgment was “ultimately a matter 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 recognized by the UNHCR and other international institutions for our exemplary treatment of refugees,” Yolande Makolo protested.
A $177 million agreement made in 2022 called for the UK to airlift thousands of asylum seekers who land on British beaches to Kigali.
“We make a significant contribution to dealing with the impacts of the global migration crisis,” Makolo said. Rwanda, Makolo added, “remains fully committed to making this partnership work.”
Rishi Sunak, the prime minister of the United Kingdom, is promising to fight on. Although he respects the Court of Appeal, he notes that he “fundamentally” disagrees with its assessment on Rwanda. Sunak believes Rwanda is assuring that asylum seekers resettled there won’t be sent back to a third country.
Business model of human traffickers
Sunak asserted, “Rwanda is a safe country. The Supreme Court concurred. For Libyan refugees in Rwanda, the UNHCR has its own refugee program. We shall now ask for authorization to take this ruling to the Supreme Court on appeal.”
His government said that the proposal will destroy the business model of human traffickers. Its detractors, however, claimed that the strategy is not only cruel but ineffective. Rwanda is not safe third nation, the Court of Appeal said by a vote of two to one on Thursday, June 29.
Suella Braverman, the home secretary, expressed her regret for the “disappointing” decision in the House of Commons on Thursday. She cautioned that “the British people will no longer indulge the polite fiction that we have infinite capacity to support everyone in the world” escaping persecution.
Read also: Better migration policies can speed up prosperity globally – World Bank
The decision was made just days after the Home Office’s own legal analysis of the Rwanda plan revealed that keeping migrants in the UK would be cheaper by $80,000 than deporting them to Rwanda, which would cost an estimated $214,740 per immigrant.
The Rwanda scheme is unworkable
The government’s plan to send migrants to Rwanda is “completely unraveling.” This is according to Shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, who called out ministers for not undertaking “even the basic work to ensure that the Rwanda scheme was legal or safe.”
“The Rwanda scheme is unworkable, unethical and extortionate, a costly and damaging distraction from the urgent action the government should be taking,” Cooper noted.
A hastily made decision by the European Court of Human Rights a year ago prevented the first deportation flight. The government cannot deport asylum seekers until the British legal case is determined.
The High Court declared the policy to be legal in December. Asylum applicants from a number of nations, including Syria, Iraq, and Iran, and human rights organizations, disputed the judgment.
According to UK Home Office figures, 3,859 Albanians could be send to Rwanda if the deportation agreement goes through. Iran, with 2,715, Eritrea, with 2,558 and Afghanistan, with 2,555 asylum seekers, round out the top 10.
No real prospect of going to Rwanda
In the legal challenge that was successful in the court of appeal on Thursday, Toufique Hossain of Duncan Lewis lawyers, who represented seven of the asylum seekers facing forcible transfer to Rwanda, said: “Torture survivors from places like Iran, Eritrea, Syria and Sudan are languishing in the asylum system with no real prospect of being removed to Rwanda. The dehumanising impact of living in limbo like this is cruel. The Home Office should urgently review its policy and process these claims immediately.”
The Republic of Rwanda is a landlocked country in East-Central Africa. It is borders Uganda to the north, Tanzania to the east, Burundi to the south. Uganda is also one of the nine countries bordering the Democratic Republic of the Congo to the west. The country has a population of approximately 13 million people.
Rwanda has made significant progress in various areas since the devastating genocide that took place in 1994. The country has undergone extensive reconstruction and reconciliation efforts. Today, Rwanda is on a stabile economic growth, and has advancements in various sectors, such as technology and tourism.
