A British judge has rejected the offer to land a flight because next week more than 30 asylum seekers on a one-way trip to Rwanda, but gave permission to migrants for an appeal. last minute.
Judge Jonathan Swift rejected a request from a group of asylum seekers for a precautionary measure that would land the flight scheduled for Tuesday. But he said an appeal could be heard on Monday and that a full legal challenge to the British government’s new deportation policy for Rwanda should be made before the end of July.
British Immigration Minister Priti Patel welcomed the ruling and said the government “would not be deterred” by new legal challenges.
Enver Solomon, executive director of the Refugee Council, said he was disappointed with the ruling and described the situation as “extremely worrying”.
The flight is the first to go under a controversial agreement between the United Kingdom and the East African country.
Under the new policy, migrants arriving in the UK as stowaways or in small boats will be sent to Rwanda, where their asylum applications will be processed. If they succeed, they will stay in the African country. Refugee groups say the largest group includes people fleeing Syria and Afghanistan who arrived in Britain crossing the English Channel in small boats.
When the hearing in London High Court opened, government lawyer Mathew Gullick said 37 people were due to board the flight on Tuesday, but six of them had their expulsion orders canceled. ยท Lades. He said the government still intended to operate the flight as well as the futures.
Britain paid Rwanda $ 190 million for the deal
According to the UN, this measure violates the International Convention on Refugees. Human rights groups say the deal, for which the UK has paid Rwanda $ 190 million in advance, is unworkable, inhumane and a waste of British taxpayers’ money.
Plaintiffs’ attorney, Raza Husain, said “the system is not secure.”
Laura Dubinsky, a lawyer representing the UN refugee agency, said refugees sent to Rwanda under the program were at risk of “serious and irreparable damage”. He said the agency had “serious concerns about Rwanda’s ability” to handle arrivals.
Rwanda is the most densely populated country in Africa. Competition for land and resources contributed to decades of ethnic and political tensions that culminated in the 1994 genocide in which more than 800,000 ethnic Tutsis and moderate Hutus were assassinated in an attempt to protect them.
The government of President Paul Kagame has made significant economic progress since the genocide, but critics say it has come at the expense of political repression.
Migrants are waiting on board a transport bus in the port of Dover after crossing the English Channel in Dover, Great Britain, on 3 May. According to the controversial new British policy, migrants arriving in the country by unauthorized routes will be sent to Rwanda. (Henry Nicholls / Reuters)
The UK is “turning a blind eye” to political dangers
James Wilson of Detention Action, one of the groups involved in the case, said the government “was turning a blind eye to the many clear dangers and human rights violations that [the policy] would inflict asylum seekers. “
The British government argues that the policy is in the public interest.
It aims to distinguish between refugees arriving by authorized routes, such as aid programs for people fleeing Afghanistan or Ukraine, and those who, it says, arrive by illegal means, including dangerous canal crossings. by smugglers.
The government says it welcomes refugees arriving in Britain on approved routes, but wants to put criminal smuggling gangs out of business.
More than 28,000 migrants entered the UK via the Canal last year, compared to 8,500 in 2020. Dozens have died, including 27 people in November when a single ship capsized.