LONDON (AP) – Britain canceled a flight scheduled to deport asylum seekers to Rwanda on Tuesday afternoon after the European Court of Human Rights intervened, saying the plan posed “a real risk of irreversible damage “.
The decision to abandon the flight ended with three days of frantic legal challenges by immigrant rights lawyers who launched a series of case-by-case appeals to block the deportation of everyone on the government list.
British government officials had previously said the plane would take off no matter how many people were on board. But after the appeals, no one stayed. British media reported that the number of potential deportees had been more than 30 on Friday.
Following the cancellation of the flight, Interior Minister Priti Patel said she was disappointed but would not be “dissuaded from doing the right thing”. He added: “Our legal team is reviewing all decisions made on this flight and preparations for the next flight are beginning now.”
Prime Minister Boris Johnson had strongly defended the UK plan, arguing that it was a legitimate way to protect lives and thwart criminal gangs passing migrants across the English Channel in small boats. In recent years, Britain has seen an illegal influx of migrants from places such as Syria, Afghanistan, Iran, Sudan, Iraq and Yemen.
Johnson announced in April an agreement with Rwanda that people entering Britain illegally will be deported to the East African country. In return for accepting them, Rwanda will receive millions of pounds (dollars) in development aid. Deportees may apply for asylum in Rwanda, not in Britain.
Opponents have argued that it is illegal and inhumane to send people thousands of miles to a country where they do not want to live. The leaders of the Church of England joined the opposition, calling the government’s policy “immoral”. Prince Charles was among those opposed, according to British news.
Activists have denounced the policy as an attack on refugee rights that most countries have recognized since the end of World War II.
Refugee Council Executive Director Enver Solomon said the British government’s threat of deportation would not serve as a deterrent to those seeking security in the UK.
“The government must immediately rethink an adult conversation with France and the (European Union) about sharing responsibility and trying to make an orderly, humane and fair asylum system work,” Solomon said.
The UN Refugee Agency condemned the plan for worrying that other countries would follow suit, as war, repression and natural disasters are forcing an increasing number of people to flee their homes.
Politicians in Denmark and Austria are considering similar proposals. Australia has been running an asylum processing center in the Pacific island nation of Nauru since 2012.
“Globally, this unjustified punitive agreement further deepens the evisceration of the right to seek asylum in rich countries,” said Maurizio Albahari, a migration expert at Notre Dame University in Indiana as he described UK policy.
Many millions of people around the world have been displaced over the past two decades, straining the international consensus on refugees. The world had more than 26 million refugees in the middle of last year, more than twice as many as two decades ago, according to the UN refugee agency. Millions more have left their homes voluntarily, seeking economic opportunities in developed countries.
In Britain, these pressures have led to an increase in the number of people crossing the English Channel on leaking inflatable boats, sometimes with disastrous consequences. Last November, 27 people died when their boat sank in the waters between France and England.
Johnson, fighting for his political life amid concerns about his leadership and ethics, responded by promising to stop such risky journeys.
While Rwanda was the site of a genocide that killed hundreds of thousands in 1994, the country has built a reputation for stability and economic progress since then, the British government argues. Critics say stability comes at the expense of political repression.
Filippo Grandi, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, attacked the policy as “all wrong”.
If the British government is really interested in protecting lives, it should work with other countries to attack smugglers and provide safe routes for asylum seekers, not just divert migrants to other countries, Grandi said.
“The precedent this creates is catastrophic for a concept that needs to be shared, such as asylum,” Grandi said Monday.
The Archbishop of Canterbury and 24 other bishops of the Church of England joined the chorus of voices calling on the government to reconsider an “immoral policy that is a disgrace to Britain”.
“Our Christian heritage should inspire us to treat asylum seekers with compassion, fairness and justice, as we have done for centuries,” the bishops wrote in a letter to the Times of London.
The British Supreme Court refused to hear a final appeal on Tuesday, a day after two lower courts refused to block the deportations. Legal challenges continued, however, as lawyers filed case-by-case appeals on behalf of individual migrants.
Many migrants favor Britain as a destination for language or family ties, or because it is seen as an open economy with more opportunities than other European nations.
When Britain was a member of the European Union, it was part of a system that required refugees to seek asylum in the first safe country they entered. Those arriving in Britain could be sent back to the EU countries from which they were traveling. The UK lost that option when it withdrew from the EU two years ago.
Since then, the British and French governments have worked to stop travel, with many fights and little success. More than 28,000 migrants entered Britain in small boats last year, compared to 8,500 in 2020.
Nando Sigona, a migration expert at the University of Birmingham, said there are big principles at stake if Rwanda’s policy is upheld.
“How can we establish any kind of high moral standard where we intervene in other countries if we are not signatories of protection to those fleeing war and persecution?” Sigona asked.
___
Follow AP coverage on migration issues at