From the BBC:
“Supreme Court rules Rwanda asylum policy unlawful”
The government's Rwanda asylum policy, which it says is
needed to tackle small boats, is in disarray, after the UK's highest court
ruled it is unlawful. The Supreme Court upheld a Court of Appeal ruling, which
said the policy leaves people sent to Rwanda open to human rights breaches. It
means the policy cannot be implemented in its current form.
Rishi Sunak said the government would work on a new treaty
with Rwanda and said he was prepared to change UK laws. The controversial plan
to fly asylum seekers to Rwanda and ban them from returning to the UK has been
subject to legal challenges since it was first announced by Boris Johnson in
April 2022. The government has already spent £140m on the scheme but flights
were prevented from taking off in June last year after the Court of Appeal
ruled the approach was unlawful due to a lack of human rights safeguards. Now
that the UK's most senior court has agreed, the policy's chances of being
realised without major revisions are effectively ended.
But Mr Sunak told MPs at Prime Minister's Questions that he
was ready to finalise a formal treaty with Rwanda and would be "prepared
to revisit our domestic legal frameworks" in a bid to revive the plan. A
treaty - which Downing Street has said it will publish in the "coming
days" - would upgrade the agreement between the UK and Rwanda from its
current status as a "memorandum of understanding", which the
government believes would put the arrangement on a stronger legal footing. The
new text would provide the necessary reassurances the Supreme Court has asked
for, the prime minister's official spokesman said.
Ministers have been forced to reconsider their flagship
immigration policy after 10 claimants argued that ministers had ignored clear
evidence that Rwanda's asylum system was unfair and arbitrary. The legal case
against the policy hinges on the principle of "non-refoulement" -
that a person seeking asylum should not be returned to their country of origin
if doing so would put them at risk of harm - which is established under both UK
and international human rights law. In a unanimous decision, the court's five
justices agreed with the Court of Appeal that there had not been a proper
assessment of whether Rwanda was safe. The judgement does not ban sending
migrants to another country, but it leaves the Rwanda scheme in tatters - and
it is not clear which other nations are prepared to do a similar deal with the
UK.
The Supreme Court justices said there were "substantial
grounds" to believe people deported to Rwanda could then be sent, by the
Rwandan government, to places where they would be unsafe. It said the Rwandan
government had entered into the agreement in "good faith" but the
evidence cast doubt on its "practical ability to fulfil its assurances, at
least in the short term", to fix "deficiencies" in its asylum system
and see through "the scale of the changes in procedure, understanding and
culture which are required". A spokesman for the Rwandan government said
the policy's legality was "ultimately a decision for the UK's judicial
system", but added "we do take issue with the ruling that Rwanda is
not a safe third country".
It leaves Mr Sunak - who has made tackling illegal
immigration a central focus of his government - looking for a way to salvage
the policy. In a statement issued after the ruling, the prime minister said the
government had been "planning for all eventualities and we remain
completely committed to stopping the boats". He continued:
"Crucially, the Supreme Court - like the Court of Appeal and the High
Court before it - has confirmed that the principle of sending illegal migrants
to a safe third country for processing is lawful. This confirms the
government's clear view from the outset." Mr Sunak is expected to hold a
televised press conference in Downing Street at 16:45 GMT on Wednesday.
The Supreme Court decision comes amid the political fallout
from the sacking of Suella Braverman on Monday, who, as home secretary had
championed the Rwanda policy. Following the ruling, Mrs Braverman called on Mr
Sunak to introduce "emergency legislation" which would block routes
of legal challenge, including the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) -
which some on the Tory right have called for the UK to withdraw from. Newly
appointed Home Secretary James Cleverly told the Commons on Wednesday the
government had been "working on a plan to provide the certainty that the
court demands" for "the last few months". He said upgrading the
agreement to a treaty "will make it absolutely clear to our courts and to
Strasbourg that the risks laid out by the court today have been responded to,
will be consistent with international law".
Lee Anderson MP, the deputy chairman of the Conservative
Party, urged the government to ignore the Supreme Court and "put planes in
the air" anyway. Natalie Elphicke, Conservative MP for Dover, the landing
point for many of the small boats, said the Rwanda policy is "at an
end" and "we now need to move forward". "With winter coming
the timing of this decision couldn't be worse. Be in no doubt, this will
embolden the people smugglers and put more lives at risk," she continued. But
charity Asylum Aid said the government must "abandon the idea of forcibly
removing people seeking asylum to third countries", describing the policy
as "cruel and ineffective".
More than 100,000 people have arrived in the UK via illegal
crossings since 2018, though the number appears to be falling this year. In
2022, 45,000 people reached the UK in small boats. The total is on course to be
lower for 2023, with the total for the year so far below 28,000 as of November
12.
^ I saw this coming. ^
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.