The first flight carrying asylum seekers from the UK to Rwanda will take off on Tuesday after another legal defeat for opponents calling the new government plan inhuman and “disgusting”.
Experts say the deal, which calls on Rwanda to accept and resettle migrants who arrived illegally in Britain after crossing the English Channel, will set a dangerous precedent for other countries to use the same loophole in their laws. on refugees.
“It’s a really embarrassing case of a rich country trying to avoid its minimum obligations to protect refugees,” said Audrey Macklin, a professor and professor of human rights law at the University of Toronto.
“So it’s a pretty disgusting move.”
Read more: As the West opens its doors in Ukraine, millions more refugees are suffering around the world
The story continues under the ad
The London Court of Appeals on Monday rejected an offer by human rights groups and activists to stop the first flight under the policy, refusing to issue an interim order while a case that challenged its legality goes through courts.
Filippo Grandi, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, criticized the policy after the verdict, describing it as “all wrong”.
“The precedent that this sets is catastrophic for a concept that needs to be shared, such as asylum,” he told reporters in Geneva.
Here’s what you need to know about the controversial plan and what’s next.
2:04 Controversial one way ticket: UK plans to send asylum seekers to Rwanda Controversial one way ticket: UK plans to send asylum seekers to Rwanda – April 14, 2022
What is the agreement between the United Kingdom and Rwanda?
The agreement between Britain and Rwanda was announced and signed in April, and will have an initial duration of five years, according to the Rwandan government.
The story continues under the ad
The deal included an initial payment to the African nation of £ 120 million ($ 188 million) to help pay for resettlement and integration. The UK has agreed to make additional payments based on the number of people deported.
The plan will see some people arriving in Britain as stowaways in trucks or small boats picked up by the UK government and flying 6,400 kilometers to Rwanda on a one-way trip.
Asylum applications will be processed there and, if successful, migrants will be able to stay.
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has said the policy will become a deterrent to human trafficking networks and curb the flow of migrants who risk their lives crossing the Canal from northern France, which has been used for a long time. of time as a launching point for refugees fleeing war-torn or poverty-stricken. countries in Africa and the Middle East.
1:47 Aid groups react to the tragedy in the English Channel, say migrants need better options Aid groups react to the tragedy in the English Channel, say migrants need better options – 25 de November 2021
The government says the number of migrants making these crossings is rising. Last year, 28,526 arrivals were detected, more than just 299 in 2018. Dozens have died over the years, including 27 people in November when a single ship capsized.
Trend stories
-
Passport renewal times now online as Ottawa seeks to address long queues
-
Canada and Denmark reach an agreement to end the dispute over the small Arctic island
The story continues under the ad
Rwandan Foreign Minister Vincent Biruta said in April that the agreement “is about ensuring that people are protected, respected and empowered to promote their own ambitions and settle permanently in Rwanda if you want it “.
He said his country already hosts more than 130,000 refugees from countries such as Burundi, Congo, Libya and Pakistan.
Critics have expressed concern that Rwanda is not the safe haven as the Johnson government has painted it. The UN has said that Rwanda, whose human rights record is under scrutiny, does not have the capacity to process claims and there is a risk that some migrants may be returned to the countries from which they had fled.
The risks faced by migrants in Rwanda include “indefinite detention, ill-treatment including torture in detention, lack of any independent judiciary and also, very, very worrying, the fact that any form of dissent is suppressed. in Rwanda, “said Yasmine Ahmed, director of the United Kingdom. by Human Rights Watch.
Several lawsuits were quickly filed after the agreement was signed, arguing that it violated the 1951 Convention on Refugees signed by members of the United Nations, including the United Kingdom.
The story continues under the ad
Macklin explains that under the Refugee Convention, asylum-seeking refugees cannot return to the country from which they are fleeing. However, the document says nothing about whether these refugees can be sent to a third country.
“It’s just because no one thought any country would resort to that,” Macklin said. “It was hard to imagine this happening in 1951, so it wasn’t included. It wasn’t even on the horizon.”
Read more: 27 migrants killed in the sinking of a ship crossing the English Channel
He said the UK and other European nations that have taken a strong stand against immigration, including Denmark, have interpreted the omission to mean using third countries as acceptable, which he described as “false”.
The case challenging the legality of the agreement is due to go to the London High Court in July. Meanwhile, humanitarian groups have tried to block flights to Rwanda until the case is resolved.
After a judge on Friday refused to issue a temporary precautionary measure, a coalition of immigration rights activists and public employees’ unions sought an appeal, which was rejected on Monday.
Under UK law, a court must find that there is solid evidence that government policy is likely to be declared illegal before it can issue a temporary precautionary measure.
The story continues under the ad
At least three more legal challenges seeking to remove people from the flights were due to be heard on Tuesday.
3:19 Global migrant crisis worsens during pandemic Global migrant crisis worsens during pandemic – January 2, 2022
Amid legal challenges, the number of people bound for Rwanda on Tuesday’s flight has steadily declined.
The charity Care4Calais said all but six of the 37 migrants initially said they would be on the first flight had their tickets canceled, after lawyers challenged the merits of the individual deportation orders.
The story continues under the ad
According to the charity, the migrants initially scheduled for the flight included people fleeing Afghanistan and Syria, as well as Iran and Iraq.
If the judicial review of the agreement next month finds that the policy is illegal, it could lead to anyone being transferred to Rwanda being sent back to the United Kingdom, restarting their application for asylum.
3:16 Migrant debate divides Europe Migrant debate divides Europe – June 18, 2018
Meanwhile, Macklin says more legal challenges and continued pressure from protesters and advocates will be needed to try to delay or stop the plan.
“Anything that makes it physically impossible for a flight to take off, where people get in the way of the implementation of this policy, is certainly one way,” he said.
“But it’s hard to be optimistic when so far no court has recognized … the irreparable damage this will do to countless people as we wait to see if the policy will be maintained.”
The story continues under the ad
– with Redmond Shannon files from Global, Reuters and the Associated Press
© 2022 Global News, a division of Corus Entertainment Inc.