The British government wants to fly asylum seekers to Rwanda so that their procedures can be carried out there. So far, judges have blocked the project. Now the Supreme Court decides.
Asylum policy is one of the most important issues for the Conservative Party and the British government. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has promised to significantly reduce the number of refugees coming to the UK.
“I will do everything I can to stop the boats,” Sunak said at the Conservative party conference. This refers to the boats that refugees use to cross the English Channel from France.
In 2022 there were 46,000. This year the number is likely to be significantly lower, but from the Tories’ perspective there are still too many.
Asylum – but in Rwanda
The agreement with Rwanda is therefore a central component of British asylum policy. The government wants anyone who enters the country illegally to be flown out to Rwanda. An asylum procedure should then be carried out in the African country.
The special thing about the British plans: Anyone who is entitled to protection should then be allowed to stay in Rwanda – but not be sent back to Great Britain.
Plans by German politicians, for example the SPD, envisage something different: According to this, asylum procedures should be able to be carried out in third countries. If such a procedure ends with the recognition of refugee status, and that is the difference, these people should be brought to Germany or the European Union.
Bravermann’s wish
The British government had long wanted to start flights to Rwanda, but the courts stopped the process. For the right wing of the Conservative Party, deportation remained a dream.
“An article on page 1 of the Daily Telegraph saying flights to Rwanda are allowed to take off is my dream,” said Suella Braverman, the recently sacked interior minister. She was considered a hardliner, but her successor James Cleverly will pursue the same goal.
He spoke to Prime Minister Sunak – the goal was to keep the promises to stop the boats. The Conservatives hope that the flights to Rwanda, if they ever take off, will deter more refugees from coming to Britain. Migration researchers doubt this deterrent effect.
The court has the last word
The British Supreme Court is making its decision today. Another court – the Court of Appeal – had previously ruled that Rwanda is not a safe country for refugees and that there are deficiencies in the asylum system there.
If the court continues to ban deportations to Rwanda, it would be a serious setback for the Sunak government. A central component of asylum policy would then continue to not work. The debate in the Conservative Party about relaunching the policy, possibly in collaboration with another country, would gain momentum again.
The discussion about the question of whether Great Britain should withdraw from the European Convention on Human Rights would then become louder again. Supporters of this move argue that Britain should not commit itself at this point.
Rwanda flights in January?
If the court gives the green light for the deportations, this would initially be a boost for the British government. It is said that flights could start as early as January.
However, it is unclear whether this will reduce the number of refugees. And: The costs of the Rwanda policy are significantly higher than those of conventional processing of asylum procedures.