The British government announced in April that it had reached an agreement to send asylum seekers to the East African country, in a move it insisted was aimed at disrupting human trafficking networks. and deterring migrants from making the dangerous crossing of the Channel to England from Europe.
Judge Swift on Friday rejected the urgent demand by activists in London’s Royal Courts of Justice, saying there was a “material public interest” in the “balance of convenience” in allowing flights to continue while the judicial review was in progress. course.
The first flight, scheduled to leave the UK on Tuesday, is to take refugees to Rwanda as part of the controversial scheme by the Interior Ministry to prosecute asylum seekers across the East African country. .
The scheme is under judicial review in the Royal Courts, where a decision on its legality is expected in late July.
The government intends to dissuade people from crossing the English Channel by relocating asylum seekers to Rwanda. Interior Ministry lawyers told the court that the plan should not be stopped because of legal challenges because it was in the public interest.
The challenge was presented by the human rights groups Care4Calais and Detention Action, together with the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS), a trade union representing civil servants in the UK Home Office, and four asylum seekers. facing deportation to Rwanda. They claimed that the policy of the UK Home Secretary, Priti Patel, was “illegal on multiple grounds” and called for a court order to prevent the plane from taking off.
Nada Bashir and Joseph Ataman of CNN contributed to this report from Calais.