Supreme Court
British asylum pact with Rwanda is illegal
Anything but happy about the court decision: Rishi Sunak. photo
© Leon Neal/PA/dpa
Prime Minister Sunak had promised that he would stop irregular migration. But his plan is torn apart by the Supreme Court. Now the pressure on the head of government from within his own ranks is likely to continue to increase.
British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has suffered a crushing defeat in court in one of his most important political projects. The Supreme Court rejected the conservative head of government’s plans as illegal migrants who entered the country irregularly, regardless of their origin to deport Rwanda and apply for asylum there. Sunak then defiantly announced that he would still like to implement his plans through “emergency legislation” and declare Rwanda a safe third country.
In a press conference, Sunak took up calls from the right wing of his Conservative Party to block an appeal by those affected to the European Court of Human Rights. The deportation flights to Rwanda would take off in the spring, the prime minister said. “I will not allow a foreign court to prevent these flights.” It is also possible that Great Britain will leave the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
Court sees significant problems for refugees in Rwanda
The British Supreme Court made it clear in its ruling that it does not consider Rwanda, an East African country, to be a safe third country. The Supreme Court relied primarily on reports from the UN refugee agency UNHCR as well as previous British information about extrajudicial executions, deaths in custody as well as torture and a high level of rejection of asylum applications from conflict areas such as Syria.
There is therefore a risk that refugees will have no chance of a fair asylum procedure in Rwanda and that they will be threatened with deportation to their home country. The court emphasized that not only the ECHR, but also the United Nations Refugee Convention and other agreements prohibit the return of asylum seekers.
Stopping irregular migration is a central promise
Sunak has promised to stop the small boats that migrants use to reach the country across the English Channel. Last year more than 45,000 people came to Britain this way. Although the number in 2023 is lower than in the previous year, the promise is not yet considered to have been fulfilled. The Rwanda plan was a central part of Sunak’s government program – the ruling is therefore a further setback for the prime minister. His Tories are far behind the opposition Labor party in polls. The next parliamentary election will take place in January 2025 at the latest.
The plan was to deport irregular migrants directly to East Africa in the future without examining an asylum application and allow them to seek protection there. A return to Great Britain was therefore ruled out. The project, for which the British government has already paid more than 140 million pounds to Rwanda, was met with strong criticism at home and abroad. The UNHCR condemned the action as a breach of international law. England’s bishops spoke of a “disgrace for Great Britain”. There are also doubts as to whether the hoped-for deterrent effect would actually occur.
Sunak’s first reaction calms the Tory right wing
The court decision had put Sunak under pressure within his party. In front of the press, he now showed understanding for “emotional” demands such as those from Deputy Managing Director Lee Anderson that he should ignore the verdict and simply put migrants on the next plane. The British are fed up with their parliament not being allowed to do what it was elected to do, said Sunak.
The 43-year-old’s concession is likely to calm the right wing of the party, which has been in turmoil since the previous Interior Minister Suella Braverman was expelled. The right-wing politician, who according to commentators wants to become Tory leader herself after the expected election defeat, accused Sunak after her dismissal of lying to voters and deceiving the country.
In parliament, Braverman’s successor James Cleverly announced a new contract with Rwanda. It should be established that asylum seekers cannot be deported to another country. But even in the event of a new contract, it is unlikely that a plane will take off to Rwanda any time soon. Commentators emphasized that the Supreme Court had criticized institutional problems in Rwanda.
British government refers to debate in Germany
Cleverly said that other countries would follow the British example in their asylum policies and also referred to Germany. Recently there have been calls in the EU and Germany for asylum procedures to be outsourced to third countries. At the urging of the Prime Minister, the federal government confirmed that it wanted to examine asylum procedures outside of Europe. However, a federal-state resolution does not go into detail here. However, the SPD prime ministers made it clear that they could only imagine that asylum applications would be checked before entry. They rejected a one-way ticket to Rwanda, as Great Britain is planning.